Thoughts on Inglourious Basterds

Thursday, April 15, 2010 5:34 PM By Simon

Am I wrong to think to myself that this might be a comment on the straightforwardness of movies...how everyone somehow knows everything in a given film?

Because, in this, nobody ever knows the whole story. Shoshanna knows nothing about the Basterds, the Basterds don't know of Shoshanna--in fact, nobody knows of Shoshanna. Nobody ever really lives to tell the tale of the basement bar, besides a passing reference to a fateful hand gesture. How Hitler and his crew went down. Even we, the audience, don't know the full story...because we never find out how Shoshanna ended up as she did, what happened to the remaining Basterds...

In fact, the only character who seems to be in the know (almost), is Hans Landa. He is the connection between the storylines, the common denominator. Therefore, he will know more than anyone else...but does he know who Shoshanna is, what her plot is? Why did he let her go? Why, really, did he do anything he did?

The most burning question: What the hell happened to the vet?

6 comments:

Robert said...

I love this movie...but in regards to your thought process, that makes total sense and I actually read something on that fridge logic website you shared the other day that really opened a new door for me about this movie. You should try to find it!

April 15, 2010 at 9:13 PM
Dannie said...

woah...mindfuck...

April 15, 2010 at 9:15 PM
Michael C. said...

Interesting.

That sheds new light on the ending, when Aldo marks Landa. So much of what happened in the movie is going to be lost to history, like the events of the tavern and Shoshana's actions. Landa's evil was poised to join them on the list of things never to be known until Aldo did what he did.

April 16, 2010 at 7:56 AM
Luke said...

Trippy. And true. Tarantino certainly has a knack for creating several different worlds of view in one movie.

April 16, 2010 at 8:48 AM
James D. said...

One of the things that irked me was that Donny and the other Basterd did not seem surprised that the building was on fire. It isn't as if there is some valid reason for it.

April 16, 2010 at 3:07 PM
Simon said...

@ James D.--I assume they were so in the moment they didn't care one way or the other.

April 16, 2010 at 5:30 PM