REVIEWS OF RENTED DVDs I GET IN THE MAIL

Posts Tagged ‘fantasy’

NINE (2009)

In Drama, Motion Pictures, Musical, N, Sci-Fi/Fantasy on June 12, 2010 at 1:19 am

Bookmark and Share

STUDIO – The Weinstein Company

CASTDaniel Day-Lewis, Marion Cotillard, Penélope Cruz, Sophia Loren, Nicole Kidman, Dame Judi Dench, Kate Hudson, Stacy “Fergie” Ferguson

DIRECTOR – Rob Marshall

MPAA Rating: PG-13

In 1982, Raul Julia took the Broadway stage to star in a musical based on the Federico Fellini classic . It won four Tony Awards, and ran for over 800 performances. Then, in 2003, Antonio Banderas starred in the Broadway revival of the production, which garnered two more Tonys. And in 2009, Chicago director Rob Marshall has brought Nine to the big screen, this time with two-time Oscar winner Daniel Day-Lewis as tormented film director Guido Contini.

It is 1965, and the celebrated auteur has been hounded by his staff, the producers, and his regular star and muse, Claudia Jenssen (Nicole Kidman), to produce a script (or at least reveal some plot points) for his latest project, to be entitled “Italia”. But there is one small issue: There is no script. During a press conference, Guido slips out and drives to a remote spa hotel to try to unwind from the all of the pressure. He’s so stressed, he invites both his wife Luisa (Marion Cotillard) and his mistress Carla (Penélope Cruz) to join him. Before he knows it, the whole production staff shows up, and they have set up shop at the hotel to work out the details of the new movie.

Guido (Daniel Day-Lewis) greets Luisa (Marion Cotillard) at the hotel

I found Nine to be quite entertaining. Daniel Day-Lewis seemed to competently channel Marcello Mastroianni with ease. The casting bore a few surprises, and admittedly a few raised eyebrows. Nearly all the musical numbers were showstoppers. In particular, I give “thumbs-up” (sorry, Mr. Ebert) to four daring numbers. First is Cruz’s smoldering “Call From the Vatican”, a playful, flirtatious, and not-innocent-at-all phone sex romp that was one clever camera angle shy of giving this movie an “R” rating. Kate Hudson was a pleasant surprise playing Stephanie, a star-struck fashion reporter convinced that Guido is Italy, and her number “Cinema Italiano” (written specifically for the movie), is the highlight of the movie. The next performance piece of note goes to Fergie (yes, as in Black-Eyed Peas) as Saraghina, and her number “Be Italian”, in which she (and her ladies) instruct young Guido and his classmates on the ways of love. Finally, Marion Cotillard had two songs in Nine, but it is her second number, “Take It All”, an angry striptease directed at Guido, that got my attention.

And the other women? You couldn’t get much better than Dame Judi Dench as costume designer Lilli, and the incomparable Sophia Loren as Guido’s mother. By the way, I think casting Sophia Loren in this movie gives it validation, as she has been associated with Italian cinema for her entire illustrious career, including a couple of movies directed by Fellini himself.

Nine was filmed both on location in Italy, and in a partially-constructed set for “Italia”, which serves as the stage for the musical numbers, each showing the set in various stages of construction. It also functions as Guido’s imagination, dark, fragmented, and full of sexual energy. This actually helped to make the story easier to follow than your average musical. Director Rob Marshall (himself a Broadway veteran) employed this tactic with Chicago, but here I think worked with greater effect.

There are a few weak spots in this movie. For example, I felt that one of the more pivotal scenes, in which Luisa spots Carla in the restaurant, seemed somewhat contrived. There are also plot differences between Nine and , some of which worked and some which did not. I will not spoil those plot points here, so I will only recommend you screen both movies (like I did) and spot them yourself. Besides, the basic story is still the same, as well as most of the characters’ motivations.

The DVD’s special features include rehearsal and audition footage for the movie, as well as behind-the-scenes looks at the choreography of selected songs, and even a few music videos. I know I’ve already stated this, but I was particularly impressed with Kate Hudson’s number. In one featurette, she explains that even she didn’t know she had it in her, but then again her mother was a go-go dancer on “Rowan & Martin’s Laugh-In” back in the 1960s (Yes, that really is Goldie Hawn in body paint and a bikini).

Nine is a competent retelling of one of Fellini’s greatest movies, but where is succeeds in production value, it does lack a bit in the pacing of the non-musical portions of the movie. Still, it is an irreverently sexy spectacle, sure to please both the eyes and the ears. Oh, by the way, I think Fergie needs to tackle Broadway and more film projects; she is far too talented to have a pop music career.

3-1/2 (out of 5)

8½ (1963)

In #, Classic, Comedy, Foreign, Independent, Motion Pictures, Sci-Fi/Fantasy on June 9, 2010 at 1:15 am

Bookmark and Share


STUDIO – Embassy Pictures

CASTMarcello Mastroianni, Claudia Cardinale, Anouk Aimée, Sandra Milo, Rosella Falk, Barbara Steele, Madeleine Lebeau, Caterina Boratto, Eddra Gale, Guido Alberti, Mario Conocchia

DIRECTORFederico Fellini

NOT RATED (MPAA Equivalent: PG-13)

For many years, I have heard about , the acclaimed film by Italian director Federico Fellini. But because I generally have an aversion to non-English-speaking movies (I confess, a rather unhealthy centrist conceit), I avoided this movie for fear that I would not understand it. I had seen only a couple of European movies before (specifically, Fritz Lang’s Metropolis and the 1949 French movie Gigi, which would later be remade into the Best Picture of 1958). It takes a certain kind of talent to read subtitles and still be able to follow the movie; recall that I had a little difficulty with Inglourious Basterds a few months ago. So, sitting through a film like would appear to pose a unique challenge, and rather than stay safely in my American hole, I took a chance and expanded my horizons.

This movie opens at a health spa at a remote location somewhere in Italy, where film director Guido Anselmi (Marcello Mastroianni) is trying to escape the rigors of his everyday life and prepare for his next movie at the same time. Reporters, gossip columnists, producers, diva actresses, his wife, his mistress, and even a Cardinal all play their parts in both running interference and contributing to the movie’s creation. At the same time, Guido’s dreams of escapism and sexually-charged recalled memories from childhood step in to influence his decision-making process. To make things even more twisted, Guido starts incorporating these dreams and fantasies into his movie, causing everyone to wonder just what Guido’s movie is all about.

Guido and his wife Luisa (Marcello Mastroianni, Anouk Aimée) at the café

Confused yet? To blur the lines between art and reality even further, is a movie about the making of… . Now, you’re all mixed up, aren’t you? Well, considering that the working title of this movie was La Bella Confusione (“The Beautiful Confusion”), it is easy to spot that Fellini himself wasn’t sure which direction this movie was going, either. Officially, this is Fellini’s ninth movie, but because it’s a left-turn from his usual fare, and because it is somewhat autobiographical, the title is based on his notion that it’s “movie 8½” to him, nestled between La Dolce Vita (1960) and Giulietta Degli Spiriti (1965). As a result, is about as “meta” a movie can become, with disjointed imagery that actually forms a cohesive whole. For example, early in the movie, Guido and his mistress, Carla (Sandra Milo), are engaging in a little sexual role play. At one point, he takes her eyeliner and draws garish eyebrows onto her forehead. This is a deliberate reference to a beach-dwelling prostitute he’d known when he was a child; she was called “La Saraghina” (Eddra Gale), who is later introduced during a flashback.

Fellini’s use of imagery, from the claustrophobic dream of the traffic jam at the beginning of the movie, to the Dante’s Inferno-esque descent into the spa’s steam room all carry significance; of course, some are more obvious than others. In a fantasy, we first see the lovely Claudia (Claudia Cardinale) as wholesome and pure, dressed in white; when we finally meet her in person, she is glamorous and sexy, dressed flamboyantly in black. It is also no coincidence that Fellini peppered with quick glimpses of a mysterious woman, one of which bearing her likeness on a Virgin Mary. This woman was Caterina Boratto, a renowned Italian actress and Fellini’s “dream girl” from his own childhood.

Now, I’m not about to try to examine this movie. There are college courses in Italian cinema because of , and numerous students have dissected this movie in their Masters theses for over 40 years. But watching this movie was indeed an eye-opening experience, filled to the brim with unconventional cuts, shots, dialogue, and editing, all of which seem to give a life of its own. I screened it twice, first by watching the movie itself, then by listening to the essay commentary which provided some of the tidbits of information I have learned. The commentary examines the reasons why old women were cast as Catholic priests in one scene, and in another the Cardinal (Tito Masini) is shown as nothing more than a naked old man. And then there’s the elephant in the room: the giant scaffolding which is to become a launchpad for a rocket in Guido’s movie. I hope I’m not giving too much away when I say that I knew something was up when a producer shows a two-foot tall matte painting of a rocket to be superimposed onto the full-scale launchpad shown under construction. According to the commentary, Fellini had ordered the scaffolding to be built as high as the workers could get it, but even he had no idea what he was going to do with it.

The two-disk set comes packed with features, including interviews with co-star Sandra Milo, who recounts her 17-year love affair with Fellini (even after she had married someone else), assistant director Lina Wertmüller, who went on to have a distinguished career of her own, and three-time Academy Award-winning cinematographer Vittorio Storaro, who shared his thoughts on how Fellini achieved his vision on-screen. There is also a 1969 pseudo-documentary by Fellini which aired on NBC; in it, he traces the creative process in the casting of his next project. It plays off as a mini-, complete with reporters, actors, and producers all vying for an audience with Fellini.

But what fascinated me was a German documentary about composer Nino Rota, a reclusive musical savant best known for two things. First was his famous collaboration with Fellini, which rivals that of Spielberg and Williams, or Burton and Elfman. A typical meeting between Fellini and Rota would have the two at a piano, trying to hammer out a composition for a given movie, only to give up hours later, exasperated. Then, as Fellini would leave the room, Rota would improvise a piece (probably just to relax after a hard day), and Fellini would exclaim “That’s it! That’s the music I want!” But Nino Rota was also notorious for recycling his music. Did you know that his Oscar nomination for Best Musical Score for The Godfather was withdrawn because it was based on his score for Fortunella (1958)? Listen for yourself, and you will recognize it!

So, I have long last come to the conclusion of another long review. But, as is often the case, there was plenty of ground to cover. Fellini’s is a movie different from any other. Elements and inspirations from Citizen Kane, “Pinocchio”, Dante’s Inferno and even the Keystone Cops, as well as Fellini’s unique ability to draw from memory to feed his imagination, make a standout among classic cinema. You may need to watch it more than once to get it, but this one is worth the effort.

HEAVENLY CREATURES (1994)

In Biography, Crime, Drama, H, Motion Pictures on April 12, 2010 at 12:54 pm

Bookmark and Share

 

STUDIO — Miramax 

CAST — Melanie Lynskey, Kate Winslet, Sarah Pierse, Diana Kent, Clive Merrison, Simon O’Connor 

DIRECTOR — Peter Jackson 

MPAA Rating: R 

A reader from New Zealand dropped a request in my lap: Review some of Peter Jackson’s early work. So, I threw a couple of darts at the wall, and one of them landed on Heavenly Creatures, Jackson’s take on the friendship between Pauline Parker and Juliet Hulme (Melanie Lynskey and Kate Winslet, both in their big-screen debuts), from the time they met at school in 1952, until their murder of Pauline’s mother, Honora, in June 1954. 

The movie starts as a sort of travelogue of Christchurch, New Zealand, an idyllic city which boasts friendly people, beautiful surroundings, and lots of bicycles. Suddenly, we lurch to a moment of terror: Two young ladies running through the woods, screaming in panic and covered in blood. From that moment, we are taken back in time to when these two girls first met at an all-girls preparatory school two years earlier. Right away, the dynamic between these two becomes very apparent. Pauline is very imaginative, but shy and withdrawn, while Juliet is adventurous, outgoing and worldly. But they form a bond right away because both girls had debilitating illnesses when they were young (Pauline had osteomyelitis, and Juliet had tuberculosis), and they became fast friends. 

Juliet and Pauline (Kate Winslet, Melanie Lynskey) on Easter Sunday, 1953

Prior to making this movie, Peter Jackson was best known for making low-budget horror movies. But when his wife suggested that he try his hand at a movie based on one of most infamous crimes in New Zealand history, little did she know that it would lead him to bigger and better things. But the two of them sat down and wrote the script, using writings from Pauline’s diary as a guide (The title even comes from a passage in the diary). Heavenly Creatures doesn’t focus on the murder and the trial, which were sensational in their own right, but rather it paints a portrait of the two girls’ friendship, the intensity of which brought concerns from both families that they were becoming a homosexual couple (considered a mental disorder at the time). Whether Pauline and Juliet were lovers remains under debate, that aspect of their relationship is explored in a surprisingly innocent way in this movie. 

There is a lot to talk about in Heavenly Creatures. Jackson’s skill as a director becomes apparent in this movie. He weaves a tale in both the real and imaginary worlds, and in such a way as to illustrate how Pauline and Juliet’s friendship grew stronger with each passing day. We, the viewers, are swept into this imaginary “Fourth World”, where James Mason and Mario Lanza are saints, and the girls are king and queen of the fantasy land of Borovnia. Soon, it becomes difficult to see where the real world ends and the imaginary one begins, especially when Pauline and Juliet begin to believe their parents (Pauline’s mother and Juliet’s father, specifically) are conspiring to separate them. 

For the then-newcomers Melanie Lynskey and Kate Winslet, this was a great debut for both of them. Lynskey’s shy and secluded Pauline was both painful and captivating, and Winslet proved she had star power from the second Juliet entered the classroom for the first time. Both of them were perfectly cast for this movie, and both of them have become well-known actresses as a result. They both displayed the youthful exhuberance necessary for girls of that age, as well as their characters’ obsession for each other, and their chemistry together was nearly perfect. 

Heavenly Creatures was shot on location in Christchurch. In fact, Peter Jackson went to great lengths to use as many actual sites of the events portrayed, including the now-demolished tea room where Honora ate her last meal. This lends a degree of authenticity to the movie and holds the viewer’s attention throughout. By the third act, Pauline and Juliet’s friendship had become so close, they began to take on each other’s behaviors, but to devastating effect. Pauline grew so confident so quickly, she overcompensated by lashing out at her mother. And when Juliet’s parents announced they were breaking up, she started suffering from separation anxiety. And this is merely the beginning of what became the two girls’ final act. 

Heavenly Creatures is a look at one of the world’s most shocking crimes of the 20th Century, one I would consider as notorious in New Zealand as Starkweather is in Nebraska, and Manson in California. I do not make this statement lightly, nor does Peter Jackson try to make light of it. Instead, we see two friends willing to do anything for each other, only in this case it went too far. 

3-1/2 out of 5

CORALINE (2009)

In Animation, C, Drama, Family, Independent, Motion Pictures, Sci-Fi/Fantasy on March 15, 2010 at 1:31 am

Bookmark and Share

STUDIO — Focus Features

CAST — Dakota Fanning, Teri Hatcher, Jennifer Saunders, Dawn French, Keith David, John Hodgman, Robert Bailey, Jr.

DIRECTOR —  Henry Selick

MPAA Rating: PG

I have been a fan of animation for almost my entire life, so when the Academy decided to add a Best Animated Feature category to the Oscars, I found it to be welcome news. And when Coraline became one of the nominees in this category for 2009, I decided to check it out.

Coraline is the story of Coraline Jones (voice of Dakota Fanning) whose family has just moved into a rather unusual apartment building occupied by rather eccentric tenants. Her parents seem to be too overly occupied with a catalog that they have been working on for what appears to be (from Coraline’s perspective) an eternity. In fact, when she got exposed to poison oak, her parents did nothing about it.

Coraline Jones (voice of Dakota Fanning) discovers the secret doorway

Then one day, the landlady’s grandson Wybie (voice of Robert Bailey, Jr.) drops off a gift for Coraline: a doll that looks just like her. That night, she is awakened by the sound of mice scurrying under her bed. She chases them to a secret doorway leading to another apartment  just like hers. Almost. It’s more brightly lit, the food tastes good, and her “other” parents dote on her. It’s perfect, with one exception: Everyone in this alternate universe has buttons where their eyes should be. And in order to stay in this world, Coraline must have buttons sewn into her eyes, too

I think I will stop here, because the trailer tells you this much of the story. But I have to say that I had a fair amount of expectation for this movie. It was received well by critics, it had decent box office, and it was up for the Animated Feature Oscar. This should be a decent movie, right?

Not really. Stop-motion animation is the most ambitious form of the craft. Personally, I am fascinated by it, and I wish I had the patience to do it myself. But, as the first stop-motion animated feature released in 3-D, Coraline disappoints. From the word “Go”, you are exposed to one “clever” 3-D shot after another. Okay, so I watched the 2-D version of the movie, but constantly seeing jumping mice, flying cotton candy, and numerous objects ”reaching” toward me throughout the film is not my idea of a good time. 3-D is supposed to enhance the movie experience, not dominate it. The end result is that the 3-D in this movie was too distracting. If you want to see how stop-motion animation should be done, I would like to direct your attention to Nick Park and his very talented staff at Aardman Animation (the people behind “Wallace & Gromit”, Chicken Run, and those Chevron commercials with the talking cars). I would also like to suggest the people behind this movie do the same; perhaps they might learn something from it before embarking on their next project.

As for the plot, I thought the story was very clever, but the execution was lacking the energy to drive it. By the third act, I did sit up and pay close attention, but everything leading up to it looked like it needed to be done over again. Too much 3-D distraction. Another weakness I found here was the voice talent. The most interesting character in the whole movie is the cat (voice of Craig Daniel). The rest of the cast sounded like they phoned in their lines, just so they could collect a paycheck.

To its credit, Coraline is full of stunning and sometimes original imagery, but the lackluster voice work and the overdose of old-school 3-D trickery make this movie fall flat.

UP (2009)

In Adventure, Animation, Computer Animation, Family, Motion Pictures, U on February 26, 2010 at 3:38 pm

Bookmark and Share

STUDIO — Disney/Pixar

CAST — Ed Asner, Christopher Plummer, Jordan Nagai, Bob Peterson

DIRECTORS —  Pete Docter, Bob Peterson

MPAA Rating: PG

How do they do it?

How do the geniuses at Pixar make such beautiful magic with their terrabytes of computer technology? So far, nearly every Disney/Pixar offering I have seen has been a magical ride through some of the most imaginative stories ever conjured up, and Up is no exception!

In this movie, a retired balloon vendor named Carl Fredicksen (voice of Ed Asner), faced with eviction from his home, decides to launch thousands of balloons to fly his home to South America, pursiung a life-long dream shared by him and his late wife, Ellie. Shortly after he takes off, however, he discovers a stowaway: a Wilderness Explorer scout named Russell (voice of Jordan Nagai) who is one badge short of advancing to Senior Wilderness Explorer. That badge, by the way, is the Assisting the Elderly Badge.

Carl Fredricksen's house, en route to South America

Up is a very wonderful film to watch. My only regret is not seeing it in 3-D when it was released in theatres. At the risk of sounding cliché, I laughed, I cried, my heart pounded, I cheered, and I booed. The visuals are stunning, as always, the character performances are riveting, and there is great comic relief from a talking dog (!) named Dug (voice of co-director Bob Peterson). And of course, this movie has what will arguably become the most memorable flying house since The Wizard of Oz.

Okay, the dogs don’t really talk, but they are fitted with special collars that allow them to communicate with humans, courtesy of disgraced explorer (and Carl’s childhood hero) Charles Muntz (voice of Christopher Plummer). A great running gag in this film has the dogs alerting and saying “Squirrel!” while in mid-sentence. There is a also a wonderful riff on Star Wars in this movie, too (a reference, of course, to Pixar’s origins as part of LucasFilm).

One endearing quality I found with Up is how it told the story of Carl’s life, from the time he first met Ellie when they were kids, to their marriage, to their ups and downs, and finally to her death, in only 12 minutes. It was touching and funny, and we (as the audience) learn to really care for Carl right away. It also sheds light on how some old people (especially the grumpy ones) become the way they are; in this case, Carl is so sentimentally attached to the life and home he created with Ellie, he refused to let go, even when developers tried to intervene. Carl Fredricksen will go down as one of the most memorable Pixar characters of all time. Sounds kind of strange, doesn’t it? An old man among toys (Woody and Buzz Lightyear), monsters (Sully and Mike), a car (Lightning McQueen), an insect (Flik), a fish (Nemo), and a robot (Wall-E). But I believe this to be true, and Disney will one day create an attraction centered around Carl (likely with Russell at his side). Of this, I have little doubt.

Pixar has come a long way since 1995’s Toy Story, which is an acheivement in itself. This is a must-have for any DVD collection (I would recommend the 2-disk Special Edition; the single disk has only the movie and some trailers), a must-add to your Queue, and must-see movie for all ages.

INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS (2009)

In Action, I, Motion Pictures, War on February 15, 2010 at 3:03 am

Bookmark and Share

 STUDIO — Universal

CAST — Brad Pitt, Christoph Waltz, Mélanie Laurent, Eli Roth, Diane Kruger

DIRECTOR —  Quentin Tarantino

MPAA Rating: R

O Quentin, where art thou?

When I think of Quentin Tarantino, I think of Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, and the Kill Bill saga. These are movies I could sink my teeth into (and I have). But Inglourious Basterds is a very different movie, with a very different feel to it. In fact, the only things Tarantino-esque about it are the “chapter” slates, a few select “call-back” edits, and that Samuel L. Jackson and Harvey Keitel lent their (uncredited) voices to the film. This movie features dialogue in not one, but four different languages (French, German, English, and Italian). Of all the World War II movies ever made, only a relative few don’t fall under the conventional “everybody speaks English” wisdom. While I found this delightful, I must confess I had a little difficulty keeping up with the subtitles.   

Col. Landa (Christoph Waltz) chats with Bridget von Hammersmark (Diane Kruger), while "Enzo Corlomi" (Brad Pitt) looks on

Cinematically, this is a stunning movie. Tarantino’s directing style makes for a visual masterpiece nearly every time out of the gate, in both filming and editing technique. But as I said before, this doesn’t really “feel” like a typical Tarantino movie. Yes, there is plenty of blood spatter, but it doesn’t feel as over-the-top as, say, Michael Madsen gleefully disfiguring a cop while dancing to “Stuck In the Middle with You” by Stealers Wheel.

Most of the cast did well in this movie. Kudos to Christoph Waltz as Nazi Colonel Hans Landa. In the opinion of this writer, Waltz single-handedly saved this movie from being a complete mess. In an interview, Quentin Tarantino said that without Waltz, this movie would not have been made. Frankly, I completely agree with this statement. As Landa, Waltz is both predator and slippery eel, dashing and cruel, friendly and suspicious. It is a masterful performance, with well-deserved accolades, including an Academy Award™ nomination. 

But what about the “Basterds” themselves? In the movie, they were a band of eight Jewish soldiers on a singular mission: kill the Nazis. Led by Lt. Aldo Raine (Brad Pitt), they spent a significant portion of the movie succeeding in just that. But as it turns out, the movie is not centered around them; it is primarily about a young Jewish woman who had escaped death three years earlier, only to plot revenge by killing hundreds of Nazis, including Adolph Hitler himself (!), at her movie theatre. The “Basterds” just happened to catch wind of the event and planned their own Nazi-killing party there, too.  

As is typical of any Quentin Tarantino movie, you have to suspend your disbelief. But come on! Bridge On the River Kwai (1957) was more accurate than this movie! By the time the climax started, as visually striking as it was, I ended up throwing my hands up and calling BS. I’m sorry, Quentin, but I think you went too far with this one.  

EDITED 2/25 TO ADD THE FOLLOWING:  

It is rare when I revisit a review to add to it, but I have taken some time to digest this movie a little further. As a result, I am amending my review of Inglourious Basterds.  One of the things I have overlooked is the fact that Quentin Tarantino is unlike almost any other director out there. There are so few directors working today with the passion and drive to make movies the way he does. On top of that, he carries a nearly encyclopedic knowledge of cinematic history within that oddly-shaped head of his. Both of these qualities come to the forefront in every movie he makes, and Inglourious Basterds is no exception. For example, most of the movie posters (“Nation’s Pride” and the Bridget von Hammersmark films excepted) are from real movies made in the 1920s and 1930s, and that they provide a subtext to this movie which illustrates the oppression felt by the French and the Jews under Nazi Germany, and the desire to break free from it. Also, in “Nation’s Pride”, the film-within-a-film, a John Wayne-like actor playing an American colonel gives an impassioned speech about preserving the tower where the Nazi sniper (and star of the film) is holed up. That actor is Bo Svenson, who starred in a 1978 movie entitled The Inglorious Bastards (no relation), directed by Enzo Castellari (who also has a cameo, as a Nazi dignitary at the cinema).  

It is little “Easter eggs” like this which makes watching a Tarantino movie fun to watch. It’s amazing, the things you learn from watching the Special Features disc. While I still maintain it is not one of his best films, Inglourious Basterds is still a fun-to-watch romp done only the way Quentin can do it.  

3-1/2 out of 5