User Score
7.7

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1114 Ratings

User score distribution:
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Sep 18, 2012
    8
    Inglourious Basterds is an exciting film and that is not a surprise because is a Tarantino creation, so we can notice all the things that are repeated in his filmography. First we have the desire for revenge, represented by Shosanna; here we notice the famous persistent and meticulous job of Beatrix Kiddo, and the sarcastic and dedicated work of Jules Winnfield with Vincent Vega; theInglourious Basterds is an exciting film and that is not a surprise because is a Tarantino creation, so we can notice all the things that are repeated in his filmography. First we have the desire for revenge, represented by Shosanna; here we notice the famous persistent and meticulous job of Beatrix Kiddo, and the sarcastic and dedicated work of Jules Winnfield with Vincent Vega; the shocking thing is that it all occurs at one time in one place, rather than the search that we saw on Kill Bill and Pulp Fiction.
    Second, is visible the minimalism characteristic of Tarantino, because he shows too much with little things and express a few with big things. For example: in the dialogue between Coronel Landa and Mr. LaPadite about the rats, what we actually see is a way of changing a whole ideology about what people think of Nazis and Jews; in contrast, when all the important Nazis are gadder in the cinema, and Shosanna with Marcel execute their plan, we see an enormous disaster, but is nothing more than vengeance.
    Finally, the classic fragmented reality is very well developed. Tarantino put us on his labyrinth and force us to solve his puzzle. The only failure of this film is that all the fragments (chapters) are order by time, nothing is timeless, and the development is one direction; in the other Tarantino pictures we move forward, then travel to the past and then finish in the present, preparing to jump to another time again; and that could enrich a lot Inglourious Basterds.
    The direction, music and script are just perfect and Christoph Waltz is astonishing.
    Expand
  2. MarkS
    Aug 24, 2009
    9
    I enjoyed this movie very much. I've been a Q.T. fan for as long as he's making movies. Although, this isn't as good as his crowning achievement, Pulp Fiction, it comes in as a close second. My friend feels that it started slowly, and then it was awesome. I thought it was great from start to finish. The dialogue was excellent. Scenes were often funny, but extremely intense I enjoyed this movie very much. I've been a Q.T. fan for as long as he's making movies. Although, this isn't as good as his crowning achievement, Pulp Fiction, it comes in as a close second. My friend feels that it started slowly, and then it was awesome. I thought it was great from start to finish. The dialogue was excellent. Scenes were often funny, but extremely intense at the same time. Brad Pitt speaking Eye-Tallian almost made me spray soda out of my nose. Great acting, action, and dialogue with classic Tarantino sprinkled throughout the film. If you're a Q.T. fan, you should check out this movie. Expand
  3. SimonX
    Aug 24, 2009
    10
    This is such a great movie! Christoph Waltz is unbelievably good in the role of Landa. The audiences applaused in the end and I enjoyed every single minute of this masterpiece. By the way, I'm German.
  4. AndrewL
    Aug 24, 2009
    10
    Best since Pulp Fiction. Typical of Tarantino movies the opening scene is so engaging you can't turn away. You people are morons and need to get back to your reality shows if you can't appreciate something original.
  5. TrevorD
    Nov 12, 2009
    10
    Sadly, the metacritic score that "generalizes" the reviews and critical responses to this brilliant masterpiece does Inglourious Basterds absolutely no justice. Simply put, Inglourious Basterds is Tarantino's finest work since Pulp Fiction, and quite simply one of the best films of 2009, if not the best.
  6. HarryS
    Nov 9, 2009
    10
    Very impressive. Great acting!!
  7. MaryM
    Nov 9, 2009
    10
    Best film of the year!!
  8. Aug 13, 2010
    9
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I've never been a terribly big fan of Tarantino, until now maybe. Seamless acting and considering the language barrier, highly interesting dialogue fill the film throughout. As long as your attention span allows you to read for a few minutes straight your interest should last until the visually striking action scenes. If you find yourself perhaps put off by the subtitles or the occasionally zany Colonel Landa, please watch the climactic finish with a fresh mind. It should stun anyone who will allow it to. I ended up staring blankly with my mouth agape even as the credits began rolling. That might be because I thought the movie would be, in general, historically accurate going in, but afterwards I was extremely glad that it wasn't. I was equally disappointed that this wasn't how World War II actually ended, because Hitler's face being riddled with bullets is a much more fitting way to end such a life. Speaking of fitting ends, the final line reads, "This just might be my masterpiece." Well Tarantino, I think you might just be right. Expand
  9. Aug 27, 2014
    10
    Bold and fearless throughout. Tarantino has created a film without boundaries--allowing us to immerse ourselves into his unconvential, freakish and often extraordinary adventure. Christoph Waltz gives the finest performance of the year in the best film of the year!
  10. May 24, 2014
    9
    This film is horribly inaccurate in terms of history, but screw it, it is fun as all get out. Like all Tarantino fare, we get our stylized violence, our pitch black comedy, and of course our closeup of an actress' foot (Diane Kruger here). Also, we get a great film. A close second place for me behind Pulp Fiction in terms of Tarantino, Inglourious Basterds features great cinematography andThis film is horribly inaccurate in terms of history, but screw it, it is fun as all get out. Like all Tarantino fare, we get our stylized violence, our pitch black comedy, and of course our closeup of an actress' foot (Diane Kruger here). Also, we get a great film. A close second place for me behind Pulp Fiction in terms of Tarantino, Inglourious Basterds features great cinematography and great acting, namely from Christoph Waltz, who absolutely killed it. Brad Pitt was also great and quite hilarious, to boot. From the onset of the film, Waltz' performance takes center stage as we watch him do what he does best: hunt Jews. We then see the same from his counterpart, Pitt, who is great at killing Nazis. These first two parts of the film really setup the film incredibly well for the final act, where spoilers. In addition to Waltz and Pitt, the whole cast did exceptionally well, in partucular Melanie Laurent and Diane Kruger. Michael Fassbender, Daniel Bruhl, and shockingly, Mike Myers, all have good turns as well. Throughout the film, there are many different genres being used terrifically. Of note, the comedic elements were great, in particular the scene in which Pitt attempts to speak Italian. These moments of comedy help to lighten the mood against the hyper violence that takes place (though never too dusturbing, typically the stuff depicted would bother me more, but Tarantino is so stylish, he gets away with it). However, the film also includes many thrilling/suspenseful scenes where your heart is in your throat as you await what happens, while coupling that with elements of war, drama, adventure, action genres, all of which used very artfully and really help to add to the general entertainment of the film.

    On the negative side, the final part is a tad over the top. It came off as extremely odd and slightly off putting. However, the impact on the viewer is certainly still great and any over the topness is not a major complaint, rather something small that bugged me a little bit. Overall, Inglourious Basterds is one of Tarantino's best films and ultimately worthy of the praise it has received since its release.
    Expand
  11. RobbyN
    Aug 21, 2009
    10
    Inglorious Basterds isn't going to appeal to everyone. Then again, it doesn't try to. At 153 minutes, Tarantino is given free reign to exercise every cinematic whim that floats into his twisted brain. Patience is rewarded with blistering humor and outrageously over-the-top action. For his portrayal of the evil Colonel Hans Landa, Christoph Waltz deserves an Oscar nod. Pitt is Inglorious Basterds isn't going to appeal to everyone. Then again, it doesn't try to. At 153 minutes, Tarantino is given free reign to exercise every cinematic whim that floats into his twisted brain. Patience is rewarded with blistering humor and outrageously over-the-top action. For his portrayal of the evil Colonel Hans Landa, Christoph Waltz deserves an Oscar nod. Pitt is absolutely hysterical and magnetic as ever. He delivers lieutenant Aldo Raine's lines in a voice that's a cross between George W. Bush and Billy Bob Thornton in Sling Blade. Expand
  12. Aug 13, 2010
    9
    One of the biggest surprises of the year, 'Inglourious Basterds' is definitely a great film, and one of Tarantino's best.
    With one of the best best acting ensembles of recent memory and a (traditionally Tarantino) excellent and interesting story line, it provides for two very important elements of any good film.
    Technically, the film is flawless and everything just works. It is also highly
    One of the biggest surprises of the year, 'Inglourious Basterds' is definitely a great film, and one of Tarantino's best.
    With one of the best best acting ensembles of recent memory and a (traditionally Tarantino) excellent and interesting story line, it provides for two very important elements of any good film.
    Technically, the film is flawless and everything just works. It is also highly entertaining and very funny. My favourite thing were the Italian accents of Brad Pitt and his boys. Amazing. Excellent film!
    Expand
  13. StanS.
    Aug 21, 2009
    3
    Tarantino is the King with no clothing. Lauded by critics and film aficionados, but truth be told he is an abject failure as a storyteller. His films drag and sag and never have anything beneath them besides slapstick mayhem. The Basterds are no different 2 and 1/2 hours plus ending as Eliot would put it "not a bang but a whimper."
  14. Sep 10, 2010
    10
    Fantastic Christoph Waltz ! Brilliant Tarantino! Standing Ovation for Christoph Waltz A.K.A."Hans Landa" in this movie. Best Actor for the "Oscar" in my opinion.
  15. lawrencealtaffer
    Aug 22, 2009
    3
    Some great acting and great lines but for a film that is 2.5 hours or maybe a little more there is almost ZERO character development. You have a Nazi Loyalist who completely flips in the period of 30 secs for no reason, and its never explained.. just one of many holes. Many long boring moments with characters that could have been left out...very long and overall boring film...with a fewSome great acting and great lines but for a film that is 2.5 hours or maybe a little more there is almost ZERO character development. You have a Nazi Loyalist who completely flips in the period of 30 secs for no reason, and its never explained.. just one of many holes. Many long boring moments with characters that could have been left out...very long and overall boring film...with a few great moments sprinkled in.. Expand
  16. Dec 11, 2011
    2
    Incoherent, self-indulgent mis-match of a movie. Insulting to Jews, Germans & anyone with knowledge of history or any sort of moral compass. I have no idea what this movie was trying to achieve, satisfy Tarantino's ego?
  17. Jackson
    Aug 24, 2009
    1
    I really disliked this movie. If this movie had not had Quentin Tarantino's name attached to it I'm fairly sure most reviews would have said this was garbage. It's just a movie people watch to say "It's good because it's bad, and since I'm smart I can see what the movie was -really- trying to say". Unfortunately this movie was completely directionless, devoid I really disliked this movie. If this movie had not had Quentin Tarantino's name attached to it I'm fairly sure most reviews would have said this was garbage. It's just a movie people watch to say "It's good because it's bad, and since I'm smart I can see what the movie was -really- trying to say". Unfortunately this movie was completely directionless, devoid of purpose, and did not say anything any other WWII hasn't said better. The violence also felt way too forced, which just made the experience pointlessly uncomfortable. Expand
  18. JimD.
    Feb 23, 2010
    3
    Only Christoph Watlz's excellent performance, good cinematography and a great soundtrack keep this from being a 0. It is one of the most repulsive, offensive movies I've ever seen, and the people that gave it a 10 obviously delight in seeing a theatre full of people being burned alive, mowed down by machine gun fire, and ultimately blown to bits by, get this, Jewish suicide Only Christoph Watlz's excellent performance, good cinematography and a great soundtrack keep this from being a 0. It is one of the most repulsive, offensive movies I've ever seen, and the people that gave it a 10 obviously delight in seeing a theatre full of people being burned alive, mowed down by machine gun fire, and ultimately blown to bits by, get this, Jewish suicide bombers. That the victims are Nazis is beside the point. Expand
  19. Nov 1, 2011
    3
    From this movie comes no conclusion, no morale. At the end, the only thing I felt was emptiness. The plot (if it can be called so) is simply terrible or non-existent despite the great visuals and spectacular acting (except Hitler's character, which was not realistic enough, too caricatural). It's just bundle of moments (often too long) patched up together and the two separate story linesFrom this movie comes no conclusion, no morale. At the end, the only thing I felt was emptiness. The plot (if it can be called so) is simply terrible or non-existent despite the great visuals and spectacular acting (except Hitler's character, which was not realistic enough, too caricatural). It's just bundle of moments (often too long) patched up together and the two separate story lines have no interactions other than the final location of the story. It also holds no historic value whatsoever. The violence and gore are not justified for it does not add up any values of interest to the movie. All in all, the movie has nothing beneath it, nothing to tell, and just comes short of interest in its lengthy 2.5 h, a great disappointment. 0/10 for the plot 9.5/10 for the acting 8/10 for the visuals and 0/10 for all else. Expand
  20. JeremyC.
    Aug 22, 2009
    4
    This was a film that didn't know what it wanted to be. The trailers bill it as a black comedy which led to audiences laughing at scenes that were supposed to be serious, which in turn ruined the feel of those scenes. The Michael Myers scene was completely unnecessary and ruined the film's feel and pacing. I have given Tarantino the benefit of the doubt for too long and this film This was a film that didn't know what it wanted to be. The trailers bill it as a black comedy which led to audiences laughing at scenes that were supposed to be serious, which in turn ruined the feel of those scenes. The Michael Myers scene was completely unnecessary and ruined the film's feel and pacing. I have given Tarantino the benefit of the doubt for too long and this film has convinced me that I am no longer going to give him any more of my money or time. Deathproof was not a psychological thriller or a suspense film and neither was Basterds. This film is another case of critics looking at a mudball spit out by Tarantino and treating it as gold. We get it, Tarantino has seen a lot of movies, and he loves referencing them ad nauseum in his films. I can also no longer stand his characters, yes they are not the traditional movie archetypes but they are so completely and utterly one-dimensional. Not every Nazi officer during WWII was a Sherlock Holmesian sleuth waiting to catch American spies off-guard. Also Aldo and Landa both begin the film as intelligent and crafty soldiers yet by the end they are both bumbling idiots. This is a film filled with unnecessary scenes, inconsistent story-telling, and an ungodly number of old film references. This simply was not a strong movie. Expand
  21. RMADDEN
    Aug 22, 2009
    5
    whoopee, politically corrected Dirty Dozen redux via Pulp Fiction, with BP as Lee Marvin. myself, I preferred Lee Marvin.
  22. JimSteffel
    Aug 22, 2009
    8
    Suspenseful storyline, laugh-outloud funny dialogue, and visually interesting scenes; this movie is vintage Tarentino. Great movie, loved it.
  23. Aug 16, 2010
    10
    Delirious fun from ringmaster Tarantino. Unlike any World War II film ever made. Beautiful cinematography to go along with wicked dialogue and some great performances by Waltz and Kruger. The ending has a goofy twist and adds to the continuous fun, though I will say the film is very violent, maybe his most since "Kill Bill".
  24. Jun 8, 2012
    1
    There is nothing in this movie that makes for a good movie save for an interesting opening sequence. The premise is terrible and ignores the historical context of WWII. An all Jewish unit sent to infiltrate Germany. Nevermind that it's glossed over how they get into the country. Let's ignore the fact that none of the infiltration team speaks German or any other European language fluently.There is nothing in this movie that makes for a good movie save for an interesting opening sequence. The premise is terrible and ignores the historical context of WWII. An all Jewish unit sent to infiltrate Germany. Nevermind that it's glossed over how they get into the country. Let's ignore the fact that none of the infiltration team speaks German or any other European language fluently. I'll even let it pass that the guerrilla team hangs out at the site of an ambush to torture their prisoners which is tactically absurd. What I cannot forgive is demeaning and dishonoring ourselves and our veterans by lowering ourselves to the level of Nazi's. For instance, in the ambush seen, Brad Pitt's character gives the Nazi a choice of betraying his comrades or being beaten to death. In this scene, the Nazi is the more honorable figure, selflessly going to a painful death rather than betraying fellow soldiers. Carving swastikas into the foreheads of the dead? Where is the morality or honor in that? If we have become so jaded that we cheer for the mutilation of human beings; for grizzly unjustified torture, I'm saddened for our future. It boggles the mind that we glorify this by nominating it for best picture. Not just because of vacuum of morality. It's bad writing. Taking 15 minutes to introduce multiple characters at length only to have them eliminated five minutes later is obnoxious. Especially, when no one replaces those characters. The dialogue is long winded, pedantic, and campy. The art direction seems more like it's trying to mock Saving Private Ryan than establish it's own style. I get the premise and the concept, no one likes Hitler. He was recent history's most prominent monster. But this movie cheapens the memory of those who apposed him. This should've been a straight to DVD release. Expand
  25. Sep 13, 2011
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Only Tarantino can take an event like WW2 and make a boring directionless movie like Inglourious basterds. He decides to recreate WW2 events to show the world his love for (hard on for) mindless violence and long pointless dialougues. The fundamental problem with this film, is that if you are going to recreate an actual historical event, the film has it has to be funny. Without Humor an audience familiar to WW2 history will find this to be boring inaccurate rubbish. The movie is formulated into several chapters covering lives of Shoshana who escapes near death at hands of Christopher Waltz and the nazis. I will not get to much into detail because i do not want to spoil the move. However the movie evolves into an unreleastic convulted plot to assasinate Adolf Hitler. The ending does provide a little suspense but this is around the 2 in a half hour mark. When the movies was over I was left wondering why did I waste 2 in half hours watching this abomination. All in All we have a Quentin Tarantino's wet dream of what happened in WW2, packed with mindless violence, boring dialogues and worse convuluted plot imaginable. This movie is neither humourous or entertaining. Avoid at all cost. Expand
  26. May 26, 2012
    10
    When all the story lines finally come together you realize this movie is a masterpiece. With all the cast giving breathtakingly solid performances especially Waltz and Laurent. You will be offered amazing action and wonderful cinematography to spare. I give the movie 98%.
  27. Dec 23, 2011
    0
    Enduring this film is about as close to the human suffering of the concentration camps as I can possibly experience. If you somehow found this enjoyable I hope that God will have mercy on your soul...
  28. Kerome
    Jan 24, 2010
    3
    Tarantino's world-war 2 effort is a very mixed bag: although it is a cinematographic tour-de-force and wonderfully polished in its technical execution, the nihilistic story feels like a waste of some great performances by the star-studded cast, Christopher Waltz and Diane Kruger being particularly excellent as Hans Landa and Bridget von Hammersmark. Although the violence may shock Tarantino's world-war 2 effort is a very mixed bag: although it is a cinematographic tour-de-force and wonderfully polished in its technical execution, the nihilistic story feels like a waste of some great performances by the star-studded cast, Christopher Waltz and Diane Kruger being particularly excellent as Hans Landa and Bridget von Hammersmark. Although the violence may shock and the slick scenes may briefly hold the attention, ultimately this is as soulless and empty as Deathproof, and less likable in many ways. Pulp Fiction it is not. Expand
  29. NRiding
    Jan 10, 2010
    5
    If not for the brilliant performance of Christoph Waltz this movie would have been a total write off.
  30. ricos
    Aug 30, 2009
    2
    Well, let's all lean back, shall we.. Have a drink and smoke our pipes and talk, then talk some more.. And then, just when you think we've talked enough, let's continue the conversation in french, with a german translation.. Or vice versa. You choose. I don't care. When we've finished talking, someone else will take over. They too will smoke sigars, drink whiskey, Well, let's all lean back, shall we.. Have a drink and smoke our pipes and talk, then talk some more.. And then, just when you think we've talked enough, let's continue the conversation in french, with a german translation.. Or vice versa. You choose. I don't care. When we've finished talking, someone else will take over. They too will smoke sigars, drink whiskey, maybe even milk. They'll eat cake and talk some more, some in french, then in german. This film had me leaving the theatre in pure boredom. I think I lasted about 90mins before I had worn out every imaginable sitting-position you can cram into a cinema seat. I did this for Tarantino; because I've thought he was a genius. Until now. Apparently this basterd of a movie lasts for 153mins, and something cool probably, eventually happens. But I don't care. QT has grown overconfident in his ability to produce lengthy dialogues. And here there are no "charming m*f* pigs" either.. You wait for them, of course: Those nuggets of clever conversation. But they never come.. At least not within the first 90mins. So, I didn't see the whole thing. I think if this weren't Tarantino, alot of people wouldn't. All the overrated reviews of this proves QT has reached a point where he gets a good rating by default.. I think he's developed a speech impediment. It's a damn shame. Expand
  31. Sep 21, 2011
    5
    Quentin Tarantino's "Inglourious Basterds" is a messy movie, a movie that needs precise trimming. The characters are unstable and undeveloped while the whole dialogue is extremely measured towards the Jews. I know Hitler killed a lot of them, but this is just too unfair to the Nazis. At least Tarantino had to show a little bit of respect to them, not just spitting at them and killing themQuentin Tarantino's "Inglourious Basterds" is a messy movie, a movie that needs precise trimming. The characters are unstable and undeveloped while the whole dialogue is extremely measured towards the Jews. I know Hitler killed a lot of them, but this is just too unfair to the Nazis. At least Tarantino had to show a little bit of respect to them, not just spitting at them and killing them with baseball bats. Chrisopher Waltz's performance was powerful and charismatic, but unfortunately he acted in the wrong movie. Expand
  32. May 2, 2012
    10
    A bold war movie unlike no other. The film is as funny as it is thrilling. With Inglorious Basterds Tarantino has shown once again that he can make fun thrilling stylised films while adding intricusies and good writting. Not quite Pulp Fiction but it is still very good. What a relief after the Kill Bill series to see Inglorious Basterds.
  33. JonathanG
    Aug 23, 2009
    0
    War movie? Violent? Hardly. The entire body count until the last couple minutes of the movie is in the single digits. This movie is utterly boring. I've never been tempted to walk out part way through a movie until now. I stayed, hoping it would improve, but it did not. It's as long as The Dark Knight or Transformers 2, but it doesn't have a fraction of the action.
  34. Jan 11, 2012
    1
    Odd movie.The Germans, who are supposed to be the bad guys, are made to look like the good guys. It is almost impossible to feel sympathy for the basterds after they smash in the head of a POW in the most disgusting way possible. A POW, for Christ's sake. And one with honor as well, since he refuses to betray his comrades. Cinematography is great, acting is as well, with the exception ofOdd movie.The Germans, who are supposed to be the bad guys, are made to look like the good guys. It is almost impossible to feel sympathy for the basterds after they smash in the head of a POW in the most disgusting way possible. A POW, for Christ's sake. And one with honor as well, since he refuses to betray his comrades. Cinematography is great, acting is as well, with the exception of Brad Pitt. The weirdest thing is that they use a David Bowie song that has already been used in 'Cat People'. That is really the killer. Expand
  35. eddyj.
    Jan 19, 2010
    10
    Hold up why does this movie have a 69 this is without a doubt one of the greatest films i have ever seein from the first scene to the amazing bar scene to the theater scenes i mean wow if u didnt like this film just go watch xxx state of the union since this film was too much for you.
  36. JakeK
    Sep 9, 2009
    10
    Besides Brad Pitt sounding like a constipated John Dwayne this movie is intense and spine tangling the actually kill Adolf Hitler its amazing!
  37. Bill
    Sep 10, 2009
    0
    Unless you are a sadist who revels in blood, human butchery, and overly long preposterous stories with many tedious scenes in which case it would be a 10.
  38. IgorE.
    Jan 24, 2010
    0
    Never liked Tarantino. This movie made me hate him! The most stupid movie I've ever watched.
  39. BrandonS
    Jan 2, 2010
    2
    Overlong and boring, punctuated by periodic scenes of incredibly uncomfortable violence. It's like Tarantino's other movies, only without the charm and wit. Very disappointing.
  40. JohnS
    Jan 31, 2010
    0
    You sit through the drudgery of prolonged and monoyomous dialogue only to be met by ridiculous shootouts. And it doesn't even have the decency to be short.
  41. AlistairV.
    Mar 4, 2010
    4
    This is a terrible movie, but then I'm not a fan of Terantino's work, so if you are, maybe you'll like it. However, as an objective reviewer, it's all style over substance. In a movie, the resounding question is "Is it entertaining?" The answer to that question is no, it is definitely not entertaining. There are interesting parts, but for the most part, dull, This is a terrible movie, but then I'm not a fan of Terantino's work, so if you are, maybe you'll like it. However, as an objective reviewer, it's all style over substance. In a movie, the resounding question is "Is it entertaining?" The answer to that question is no, it is definitely not entertaining. There are interesting parts, but for the most part, dull, uninteresting, not worth the watch. Expand
  42. steve
    Oct 15, 2009
    0
    Could be used as a clinical test for diagnosing brain atrophy.
  43. JamesR
    Oct 10, 2009
    1
    QT still proving he's got the subtlety of a bull with a chainsaw and the ability to turn promising subject matter into dross. Even taking into account the offensive subject matter the film could have at least had a cartoon appeal; instead it just angers and alienates the viewer. The only film I've ever walked out of at a cinema.
  44. RyanS
    Aug 21, 2009
    10
    Incredible movie. Best movie of the year so far.
  45. JaredSS
    Aug 21, 2009
    10
    Along with "There Will Be Blood", "Synecdoche, New York" and "No Country for Old Men", a top contender for "movie of the decade" as far as I'm concerned. May just be Tarantino's best.
  46. BrandonD.
    Aug 22, 2009
    6
    I'm not sure if it's the way he used them, or the amount of them over the years, but these Tarantinoisms are getting dull. This movie had a lot of potential, but did not follow through. This has turned out to be my least favorite film by Mr. Tarantino.
  47. EvinC.
    Aug 22, 2009
    1
    I went in this film expecting the best. Unfortunately, i came out feeling oh so disappointed and sad. There's no doubt, i love Tarantino and his work. But all i ask is why? Why did this film have to be bad. I permit this film the biggest letdown of the year. I only enjoyed one performance, not by brad pitt, but by another individual.
  48. JamesL
    Aug 23, 2009
    3
    I feel sorry for Brad Pitt as this is the second consecutive major bomb he has starred in. This film is simply not entertaining, funny, enjoyable, or worth your time and money. Tarantino seems to have forgotten that you need a plot, character development, dialogue that matters, and respect for the intelligence of your audience. Once can not just throw crap on a wall and see what sticks. I feel sorry for Brad Pitt as this is the second consecutive major bomb he has starred in. This film is simply not entertaining, funny, enjoyable, or worth your time and money. Tarantino seems to have forgotten that you need a plot, character development, dialogue that matters, and respect for the intelligence of your audience. Once can not just throw crap on a wall and see what sticks. That appears to be his film making approach now! This was more of a cartoon, a bad cartoon, than a movie that one could appreciate in any manner. Tarantino is washed up! Expand
  49. ChrisFritz
    Aug 25, 2009
    9
    This is Tarantino's best movie since Pulp Fiction. Great visuals and, unlike the Kill Bill's, great dialogue. For a world as visual as ours, one cannot be surprised at people being bored by the dialogue. It has great writing. I just think people expected a war movie full of action and got something different.
  50. PaulS
    Aug 25, 2009
    2
    Not very good at all. QT is and always has been a one trick pony.
  51. ScottY
    Aug 27, 2009
    2
    Chad S. You are usually a decent critic. But you missed the hear. Does everyone have Tarantino goggles on when he makes a movie. Everything in here, save for a few brilliant scenes, are awkward and embarrassing to watch. It is "film student" level amateurish which is to say there is no excuse for that at this point in his career. People, his lack of film making etiquette shows through his Chad S. You are usually a decent critic. But you missed the hear. Does everyone have Tarantino goggles on when he makes a movie. Everything in here, save for a few brilliant scenes, are awkward and embarrassing to watch. It is "film student" level amateurish which is to say there is no excuse for that at this point in his career. People, his lack of film making etiquette shows through his inexperience. He has not had proper training as of yet apparently. Expand
  52. JaredZ
    Aug 31, 2009
    1
    After releasing three masterworks--the KILL BILL series and the wonderful GRINDHOUSE, Tarantino's latest is one of his greatest disappointments...easily one of his worst. A monotonous, dreary epic, where excessive use of subtitles are used as a substitute for his usually fascinating dialogue. Brad Pitt's laughable excuse of a southern accent could just as easily have been After releasing three masterworks--the KILL BILL series and the wonderful GRINDHOUSE, Tarantino's latest is one of his greatest disappointments...easily one of his worst. A monotonous, dreary epic, where excessive use of subtitles are used as a substitute for his usually fascinating dialogue. Brad Pitt's laughable excuse of a southern accent could just as easily have been derived from watching a few episodes of "My Name is Earl". Devoid of style and an intriguing plot, this is a stiff. Expand
  53. RalphM
    Sep 20, 2009
    3
    Despite my actually leaving the cinema with a bad taste in my mouth, I have to concede that there were some excellent character dialogues and cinematography dotted throughout this film and I was impressed that such a high profile film could get away with so much German and french dialogue. However all of this was tarnished by over the top ultraviolence that makes you sad to think that so Despite my actually leaving the cinema with a bad taste in my mouth, I have to concede that there were some excellent character dialogues and cinematography dotted throughout this film and I was impressed that such a high profile film could get away with so much German and french dialogue. However all of this was tarnished by over the top ultraviolence that makes you sad to think that so many people revel in it. It made my stomach churn to think people paid to see this. Expand
  54. ChrisL
    Sep 4, 2009
    0
    The guy sitting next to me walked out. I should have followed him. The trailers make this movie seem like it's about Brad Pitt and his gang, killing Nazis in all kinds of entertaining ways. Instead you get people sitting around, talking, drinking, and smoking in German and French for 95% of the movie. Normally, Tarantino's strength is his dialogue and acting, but when almost all The guy sitting next to me walked out. I should have followed him. The trailers make this movie seem like it's about Brad Pitt and his gang, killing Nazis in all kinds of entertaining ways. Instead you get people sitting around, talking, drinking, and smoking in German and French for 95% of the movie. Normally, Tarantino's strength is his dialogue and acting, but when almost all of it is in a different language, it's just tedious. The plot is absurd, the scenes are uninteresting, the dialogue is pointless, the cinematography is ok. This movie was so bad, I started rooting for the Nazis. Expand
  55. BobJ.
    Sep 6, 2009
    1
    Great acting. Well shot. Poor story. Terribly boring, long drawn out scenes. Easily the worst movie I've seen in a while.
  56. EdS
    Sep 9, 2009
    0
    A truly dreadful film. Gratingly attention, seeking directing. Ponderous, pointless, humouless dialogue, which neither develops plot nor character, or provides even a modicum of insight or superficial entertainment. An utterly inappropriate soundtrack. A convoluted, over elaborate plot which clunks to a predicatable conclusion. Maybe it wasn't predictable, I was too bored by the end A truly dreadful film. Gratingly attention, seeking directing. Ponderous, pointless, humouless dialogue, which neither develops plot nor character, or provides even a modicum of insight or superficial entertainment. An utterly inappropriate soundtrack. A convoluted, over elaborate plot which clunks to a predicatable conclusion. Maybe it wasn't predictable, I was too bored by the end to care. Do not see this film. Expand
  57. BrookeR.
    Jan 14, 2010
    1
    Landa is the only good thing in this movie. An outstanding performance in an otherwise long, boring,piece of crap of a film.
  58. JackM.
    Jan 17, 2010
    1
    Unwatchable on several counts. In Pulp Fiction all the characters mattered. In Kill Bill also. What happened here? None of them were human beings.
  59. ChrisM
    Oct 16, 2009
    1
    This movie suffers from a flimsy script, boring dialogue, and a fantasy that is not even entertaining. The violence is over done and is not artistic and it rather comes across as cheesy. Many of the characters was not properly introduced. Brad Pitt fake southern accent is the most annoying and irritating part about this movie. Tarantino cannot even get a southern accent right. Many of the This movie suffers from a flimsy script, boring dialogue, and a fantasy that is not even entertaining. The violence is over done and is not artistic and it rather comes across as cheesy. Many of the characters was not properly introduced. Brad Pitt fake southern accent is the most annoying and irritating part about this movie. Tarantino cannot even get a southern accent right. Many of the major characters were poorly introduced which makes for a weak story/plot. Soshanna was the only compelling character in the movie but we do not see her pain. The entire 2 and half hour movie comes accross as one of Tarantino's wet dreams. Expand
  60. RobG
    Dec 10, 2009
    3
    Yes is so bad that many people think it's a good movie. Awful, boring and don't tell me that mr tarantino believes in all that c**p. Worse Tarantino movie, period.
  61. AllanF
    Dec 15, 2009
    3
    How can you call it a masterpiece without taking anything away from it. The characters never develop, Brad Pitt was definately annoying through out it. If world war 2 were fictional this may have been a decent movie. Given the subject matter you must be very careful with the way you present the story, or you must give good reason for taking such a stance. Either there was so much going on How can you call it a masterpiece without taking anything away from it. The characters never develop, Brad Pitt was definately annoying through out it. If world war 2 were fictional this may have been a decent movie. Given the subject matter you must be very careful with the way you present the story, or you must give good reason for taking such a stance. Either there was so much going on that none of it seemed important, or there really wasn't much going on and they were telling us how important it was. Like the Godfather series, the first two are excellent because they make you get to know and love the characters while they drive the story along. Inglorious would be the third, a whole movie made to tell you one thing. (Either QT hates nazis or he loves blood and facism, not sure which. In Godfather threes case it was two hours two tell you, yes, one day Michael Corleone can die. Inglorious Bastards would make an excellent short story. But it was truly hard to get through... And I mean c'mon, who watches a QT movie to read it. GAH Expand
  62. SheldonH
    Oct 4, 2009
    2
    I thought had potential, but was just too violent for me (first time I've said that)... too predictable.... oh well. Had some laughs be QT is just too predictable now.
  63. TylerH.
    Aug 21, 2009
    10
    Amazing.
  64. mark
    Aug 21, 2009
    10
    Pure Tarantino! Amazing dialogue, great references. A perfect blend of genre films such as war movies, spaghetti westerns, and nazi-sploitation. I know not everyone will like this movie. But some people are boring loser pussies who don't know a great genre film when its right in front of their face and done by the best director working right now. So, if you don't like it. Eh, to Pure Tarantino! Amazing dialogue, great references. A perfect blend of genre films such as war movies, spaghetti westerns, and nazi-sploitation. I know not everyone will like this movie. But some people are boring loser pussies who don't know a great genre film when its right in front of their face and done by the best director working right now. So, if you don't like it. Eh, to each his own...you're just not a person I would want to hang out with. later. Expand
  65. NachoC
    Aug 21, 2009
    10
    It is 9: 31 am, just 6 hours ago I was at a movie theater that was roaring in laughter, fear, anxiety and excitement as the Basterds terrorized the Nazis. Quentin Tarantino has created, in the great words of Lt. Raine, a masterpiece. A fantastic screenplay with edge of your seat moments. When I walked out at 3:00 am the only thing I wanted to do was return to that once time where It is 9: 31 am, just 6 hours ago I was at a movie theater that was roaring in laughter, fear, anxiety and excitement as the Basterds terrorized the Nazis. Quentin Tarantino has created, in the great words of Lt. Raine, a masterpiece. A fantastic screenplay with edge of your seat moments. When I walked out at 3:00 am the only thing I wanted to do was return to that once time where nazi-occupied France. Inglorious Basterds is the best film of the year. Expand
  66. RonaldB.
    Aug 23, 2009
    4
    On its own terms tolerable. But why doesn't someone make a movie about the 11 million people murdered by the Soviets?
  67. AlbertP.
    Aug 23, 2009
    2
    Personally, I can not believe all the good user reviews this movie has gotten. Are you all just Tarantino fanatics that will give him a 10 no matter what he throws your way? For the record, Pulp Fiction is one of my three favorite movies of all time. I loved Resv. Dogs, True Romance, and Kill Bill. But with Deathproof I started to see some chinks in Quentin's armor. It was Personally, I can not believe all the good user reviews this movie has gotten. Are you all just Tarantino fanatics that will give him a 10 no matter what he throws your way? For the record, Pulp Fiction is one of my three favorite movies of all time. I loved Resv. Dogs, True Romance, and Kill Bill. But with Deathproof I started to see some chinks in Quentin's armor. It was self-indulgent, way too-talky, and mediocre at best. Well, Basterds picks up where Deathproof leaves off. The funny thing is that Basterds is just as talky as Deathproof, and all of QT's other movies, but 75% of the movie is in subtitles!!! Only QT has the director capital to pull something like this off in H-town. Anyways, I did something I never thought I'd ever do - with an hour to go, I walked out of my first Quentin Tarantino movie. Expand
  68. GuyG
    Aug 24, 2009
    9
    Amazing acting and directing. Somewhat slow - But, it's Tarantino, so get used to that. The opening scene was amazingly dramatic! The main character had an amazing performance!
  69. petern
    Aug 24, 2009
    3
    I have just arrived home from watching Inglourious Basterds, and i have to say that it was a total disappointment. The movie had all of the ingredients too be something special. the performances were good, the cinematography was good. But i have to say the directing let what could have been an excellent movie spiral out of control into, into a mishmash of different genres and the whole I have just arrived home from watching Inglourious Basterds, and i have to say that it was a total disappointment. The movie had all of the ingredients too be something special. the performances were good, the cinematography was good. But i have to say the directing let what could have been an excellent movie spiral out of control into, into a mishmash of different genres and the whole things starts too look ridiculous. What had worked for Tarantino in the past seems too be old hat these days, and unless he can come up with something new i think his day has passed. I am a fan of Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction, but this movie looked like Quentin managed too actually get down on film the exact feeling that we all have when we have so much going on in our minds we find it hard too explain or put down on paper, Quentin has however managed this and the result is that feeling of so many confused ideas actually all making it to screen. Hopefully Quentin can find something new in his bag of tricks otherwise i feel it might be time for him too hang up his hat. Expand
  70. ahmedk.
    Aug 26, 2009
    3
    Terrible movie. Terrible script, not funny. The bar scene is the most tedious scene in film history. The Italian speaking joke is terrible. Once more thing, how do three non German speaking people attending an event in the presence of Hitler, Gobbels, Gurring et al get in and not get frisked and their body checked for guns and bombs around their ankles. Poor, poor movie.
  71. SteveA.
    Aug 26, 2009
    0
    The user ratings on this site are being artificially inflated by movie companies spamming the message boards to hype their unloved "blockbusters" (read all the copycat "I give it a 10/don't believe the critics" comments on this and other movie boards, particularly 'G.I. Joe'. Unfortunately the only "word of mouth" you can trust anymore is actual words out of a friend's The user ratings on this site are being artificially inflated by movie companies spamming the message boards to hype their unloved "blockbusters" (read all the copycat "I give it a 10/don't believe the critics" comments on this and other movie boards, particularly 'G.I. Joe'. Unfortunately the only "word of mouth" you can trust anymore is actual words out of a friend's actual mouth. Ask 'em - these films suck. Expand
  72. danted.
    Aug 27, 2009
    0
    Awful, very disappointed, boring, and let me tell you something i`m a really tarantino Hard core fan, but this film is terrible self-indulgence.
  73. DavidM
    Aug 29, 2009
    1
    When I read Mick LaSalle's rave review of this movie, I should have know that it would be a stinkeroo. Brad Pitt's acting was definitely bush league.
  74. BillyM
    Aug 30, 2009
    1
    One of the most boring and corniest movies I have ever set thru.
  75. QuintoT.
    Aug 30, 2009
    3
    I give this film a rating of three for being confused. The story line never gels. I saw QT interview the director of the original, Enzo Castellari. QT was very excited at remaking this low grade pulp film of the '70's. Having seen the original, I could see how QT might enjoy camping up the screen. However, this version has almost nothing in common with the original. I don't I give this film a rating of three for being confused. The story line never gels. I saw QT interview the director of the original, Enzo Castellari. QT was very excited at remaking this low grade pulp film of the '70's. Having seen the original, I could see how QT might enjoy camping up the screen. However, this version has almost nothing in common with the original. I don't fault QT for making a WWII film but if I were Mr. Castellari, I would have been offended by his utter disregard for the original story line. I would have asked him politely to make his own film and leave me out of it. Expand
  76. PJW
    Sep 12, 2009
    2
    Another piece of WWII False Heroic Exceptionalism. Most people willfully turned the other way as genocide took place and partook in more direct ways. Spare me yet another Hollywood movie creating a false hero behaving in some stylized vacuum. I'd rather have the masses see a film that showcases complacency following propaganda, re-socialization, the robotic numbing necessary to do Another piece of WWII False Heroic Exceptionalism. Most people willfully turned the other way as genocide took place and partook in more direct ways. Spare me yet another Hollywood movie creating a false hero behaving in some stylized vacuum. I'd rather have the masses see a film that showcases complacency following propaganda, re-socialization, the robotic numbing necessary to do nothing as others are killed beside you. The script lacks the humor of other QT films and the smart narrative that made you enjoy the twists of the film. Here there are so few surprises - it's an all-around disappointment. Expand
  77. TimC
    Sep 14, 2009
    3
    pollution for your mind. Has some good scenes and good acting, but the violence is a bit over the top. I could of done without seeing this movie. Almost walked out of the theater!
  78. WadeG
    Sep 16, 2009
    3
    This movie was waaayy over hyped. Also seems that the trailer tricks you into believing your going to see something more action packed. Not a great movie by any means really. Mostly long drawn out subtitled Tarantino jibber jabber. Yes, for anyone who didn't know nearly 80% of this American movie is subtitled. Normally subtitles don't bother me as I watch a lot of Japanese This movie was waaayy over hyped. Also seems that the trailer tricks you into believing your going to see something more action packed. Not a great movie by any means really. Mostly long drawn out subtitled Tarantino jibber jabber. Yes, for anyone who didn't know nearly 80% of this American movie is subtitled. Normally subtitles don't bother me as I watch a lot of Japanese movies but the painfully long conversations in this movie were hard to keep up with because the subtitles disappeared to quickly. There were only a handful of scenes that had significant action. Mostly this movie is just a boring dialog driven story about an elite group of soldiers who only have about 20 to 30 minutes of screen time throughout the entire movie. Which that is totally ok with me if thats what im expecting to see, however they marketed this movie a action packed Nazi killing extravaganza. Overall im just disappointed because I really tried to like this movie but in the long run it was just a mind numbing experience and I found myself about halfway through not really caring about what happened anymore. The only parts of the movie that were truly great to me was the first 15 minutes and the last 15 minutes and maybe a few tiny bits of entertainment throughout. Take my opinion for what its worth but I believe your money and time would be better spent somewhere else. Expand
  79. MikelS
    Sep 24, 2009
    2
    Plotless, with no character development, and a sad attempt at dark humor.
  80. TomH
    Sep 30, 2009
    1
    Infuriatingly boring and hopelessly devoid of innovation. Too bad I came with a friend or I would have left after the 45 minute mark. For now the last time I will pay for an overpriced movie ticket. I'll download the screener somewhere off the Internet in stead.
  81. RandyW
    Sep 3, 2009
    1
    I loved Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill 1 & 2, but was thoroughly disappointed with this movie. To me it seemed that the movie just plodded along. It was one of the few times I have ever considered leaving in the middle of a movie. I do look forward to more Tarintino movies.
  82. DanH
    Sep 30, 2009
    0
    One of the worst movies I've ever seen and by far tarantinos worst movie to date. All but one character was either cursory or uncompelling. There was no one in the movie to identify with and the plot was severely lacking. I was very disappointed.
  83. ArchS
    Sep 8, 2009
    1
    This is America! People speak English here! Having people speak stupid languages in movies is not realistic, it's annoying!
  84. DanielH
    Sep 9, 2009
    1
    A terrible film. Needless in so many ways. Tarantino has been left to do what he wants creatively, and what he wants to do is throw unnecessary stylized shots in the middle of scenes which are building well. I really can't describe how much I loathe this film without writing an essay, so I will just say, this is utter garbage.
  85. FDalman
    Mar 31, 2010
    2
    After a good opening scene the film descends into boredom. I found the film difficult to sit through.
  86. jerryj
    Nov 22, 2009
    0
    One of the worst movies i've ever seen. go see paranormal activity instead, it's so much better and was created at a fraction of the cost of this over-hyped over violent movie.
  87. BillM
    Dec 18, 2009
    1
    I really disliked this movie, despite the skill with which it was made. It's a violent, anti-Nazi revenge fantasy, a mixture of talk talk talk and gory violence. The worst thing about it is Brad Pitt's horrible attempt at a southern accent. What's the matter with American actors? Why can't they do accents? What was Tarentino thinking of? Every time Pitt opened his I really disliked this movie, despite the skill with which it was made. It's a violent, anti-Nazi revenge fantasy, a mixture of talk talk talk and gory violence. The worst thing about it is Brad Pitt's horrible attempt at a southern accent. What's the matter with American actors? Why can't they do accents? What was Tarentino thinking of? Every time Pitt opened his mouth I cringed. Expand
  88. LeahR
    Dec 26, 2009
    1
    The only redeeming factor of this turgid identity crisis is Christoph Waltz.
  89. AnaL
    Aug 21, 2009
    10
    It is a great ride. Didn't drag for me at all. Can't wait to see it again.
  90. EmeryB
    Aug 21, 2009
    10
    Film making at it's finest.
  91. DarrylF.
    Aug 21, 2009
    10
    This is the best Tarantino movie since Pulp Fiction. It's the kind of movie that you want see again right after it ends. It was highly enjoyable...and it was better than kill bill 1 & 2 combined (although I still loved both of those movies). Totally worth the wait.
  92. PeggyB
    Aug 21, 2009
    10
    Great from beginning to end! Some gore I had to look away from but overall absolutely absorbing and entertaining.
  93. RyanW
    Aug 21, 2009
    9
    Long in some parts, but overall an amazing film.
  94. DaveS
    Aug 21, 2009
    1
    Fantasy is one thing, but this movie is a piece of crap that not only insults those of us who had family that fought in WWII, it insults the intelligence of the average moviegoer as well. The Action was sporadic, the dialogue was a snooze. Take my word for it, if this movie (and I use that term loosely) were edited down to just the scenes you see in the Trailers, then you would have all Fantasy is one thing, but this movie is a piece of crap that not only insults those of us who had family that fought in WWII, it insults the intelligence of the average moviegoer as well. The Action was sporadic, the dialogue was a snooze. Take my word for it, if this movie (and I use that term loosely) were edited down to just the scenes you see in the Trailers, then you would have all that was worth watching, and everybody would be spared the waste of time that this flick really is. Expand
  95. NathanR
    Aug 23, 2009
    3
    Little cinematic tricks here and there will fool the moviegoer into believing they are watching something fresh and innovative. The movie is 2.5 hrs of long, drawn-out scenes that could have been easily comprised to one hour. Tarantino tries to relive Pulp Fiction vicariously throughout Basterds, which only succeeds in highlighting each and every way this movie comes up short. I pleaded Little cinematic tricks here and there will fool the moviegoer into believing they are watching something fresh and innovative. The movie is 2.5 hrs of long, drawn-out scenes that could have been easily comprised to one hour. Tarantino tries to relive Pulp Fiction vicariously throughout Basterds, which only succeeds in highlighting each and every way this movie comes up short. I pleaded with my group to leave but by that time there was only 30 minutes left. This movie should have been better. Tarantino has lost his touch. Expand
  96. DavidS
    Aug 23, 2009
    0
    Tarantino is loosing his touch. Very dull, so very dull.
  97. nirax
    Aug 23, 2009
    0
    Although i enjoyed previous Tarantino movies, this one was complete boring (no real action), hailing towards brutality towards defenseless people (this got disgusting already in one of the first scenes when a soldier did not want to betray his country by disclosing some information on a map. He was beaten to death by a laughing gang of mindless creatures which unfortunately would be Although i enjoyed previous Tarantino movies, this one was complete boring (no real action), hailing towards brutality towards defenseless people (this got disgusting already in one of the first scenes when a soldier did not want to betray his country by disclosing some information on a map. He was beaten to death by a laughing gang of mindless creatures which unfortunately would be followed the whole movie. Sad piece of crap. Expand
  98. robertp
    Aug 23, 2009
    2
    Tarentino as Spielberg. This parody of war films trivializes World War II, the Holocaust & Hitler. The real star of this movie, Tarentino, never appears on screen; but he's in every scene, the guy wearing the lamp shade, the eternal self-indulgent showoff , age 50 going 15. Brad Pitt plays his role with just the right amount of hokum, 99.44%; & the technical aspects of the film are Tarentino as Spielberg. This parody of war films trivializes World War II, the Holocaust & Hitler. The real star of this movie, Tarentino, never appears on screen; but he's in every scene, the guy wearing the lamp shade, the eternal self-indulgent showoff , age 50 going 15. Brad Pitt plays his role with just the right amount of hokum, 99.44%; & the technical aspects of the film are quite good. But overall, it doesn't work. Tarentino's next project is a romantic comedy based on the Black Death. Expand
  99. BillySingerle
    Aug 24, 2009
    9
    Stanley Kubrick once said "If you can describe it, I can film it." With Inglourious Basterds, Quentin Tarantino takes pretending and captures that magic on film. The exuberance with each scene is like going to the movies for the first time as a child, where imagination fills the screen with awe and amazement. Don't ever grow up, Quentin, your joy in making films makes films worthStanley Kubrick once said "If you can describe it, I can film it." With Inglourious Basterds, Quentin Tarantino takes pretending and captures that magic on film. The exuberance with each scene is like going to the movies for the first time as a child, where imagination fills the screen with awe and amazement. Don't ever grow up, Quentin, your joy in making films makes films worth going to see!!! Expand
  100. chrisB.
    Aug 24, 2009
    3
    The marketing and advertising for this movie is extremely deceiving and I'm pi$%ed off, and feel stupid for falling for it. Basterds was advertised as an "action" and "war" movie... it was niether one!! It was a diologue movie and the character development was so horrid that i didnt care what they were blabbering about for 2.5 hours. The saviors of the film were chris waltz and the The marketing and advertising for this movie is extremely deceiving and I'm pi$%ed off, and feel stupid for falling for it. Basterds was advertised as an "action" and "war" movie... it was niether one!! It was a diologue movie and the character development was so horrid that i didnt care what they were blabbering about for 2.5 hours. The saviors of the film were chris waltz and the german officer they broke out of prison (who they killed way to early)... Death-proof was so bad that i should have seen it coming. Tarantino tries to salute so many old movies, he just needs to focus on his own... its going to his head. Expand
Metascore
69

Generally favorable reviews - based on 36 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 26 out of 36
  2. Negative: 1 out of 36
  1. The film is by no means terrible -- its two hours and 32 minutes running time races by -- but those things we think of as being Tarantino-esque, the long stretches of wickedly funny dialogue, the humor in the violence and outsized characters strutting across the screen, are largely missing.
  2. Reviewed by: Todd McCarthy
    80
    A violent fairy tale, an increasingly entertaining fantasia in which the history of World War II is wildly reimagined so that the cinema can play the decisive role in destroying the Third Reich.
  3. In Tarantino's besotted historical reverie, real-life villains Adolf Hitler and Joseph Goebbels are played as grotesque jokes. The Basterds are played as exaggeratedly tough Jews. The women are femmes fatales.?