Topic: Badass World War 2 movie

[CMF]

here is the trailer of the new Quentin's filled of adrenaline movie Inglorious Basterds

What's better than non-stop mayhem Nazi killing action movie? 

[Robin-Graves]

Two of them? lol

[smokester]

Not sure about this at all?  It is complete fiction right? and most of Europe have reservations about America's role in World war 2 in a non fictional sense.

[CMF]

It is complete fiction right?

When did Tarantino make a documentary?
I guess it will be just a movie full of testosterone and a lot of meaningless violence. 

[jackalope21]

Not sure about this at all?  It is complete fiction right? and most of Europe have reservations about America's role in World war 2 in a non fictional sense.

how so?

[jacktheripper305]

After Benjamin Button, its good that Pitt is doing something with a little more Awesome to it. Button severely lowered his Awesome Factor.

Not sure about this at all?  It is complete fiction right? and most of Europe have reservations about America's role in World war 2 in a non fictional sense.

I'm curious also, what reservations do they have?

[smokester]

Now that would be a minefield waiting to be trodden on.

Instead I'll just say: "Overpaid, oversexed and over here".

It appears there is already some outrage from the Germans about this film, and I am still not sure about it?

[jackalope21]

Now that would be a minefield waiting to be trodden on.

Instead I'll just say: "Overpaid, oversexed and over here".

It appears there is already some outrage from the Germans about this film, and I am still not sure about it?

hopefully ALL europeans aren't ungrateful 

[smokester]

hopefully ALL europeans aren't ungrateful 

It had nothing to do with the Europeans, America effectively joined the Second Sino-Japanese War, which then became part of WW2.  Admittedly Britain had tried to buddy America into the conflict, but apparently they were too busy housebuilding

[smokester]

That is sort of the attitude that people over here dislike - the American assumption that the rest of the world owes them 'gratitude'.

The US of A delayed their entry into the war in Europe for as long as possible, which caused the maximum misery to Europe; then they only entered on terms that were to their maximum benefit, to the detriment of Europe; then they exited having wrung the best deal for themselves from the deal, again to the detriment of Europe. Their attitude to the end of the war, and their view of the Russians, forced Europe into 40 years of cold war.

Vietnam wasn't the first war in which the US military failed comprehensively to endear themselves to the indigenous populations of the countries that they were 'saving' - they made it abundantly clear that they were involved purely and only for the interests of the US of A, it was only collateral damage if the locals were helped.

None of the above is intended to be critical of the Americans, they did what any non-combatant would do on being dragged into a war that they were reluctant to take part in - the UK would maybe have done the same if they had been far enough away, but it does go some way to explain why 'gratitude' is not the primary emotion of those that were 'saved' by the Americans when they eventually deigned to come to the party.

Some of us wish that the Americans had shown the same reluctance to go to war when the Middle East was involved, but the isolationism that prevailed for so long before the US entry into WWII seemed notably absent when W was in charge, and wanted to show off how macho he was - but strangely enough the view of the locals seems pretty much the same. I guess you could describe the attitude as 'ungrateful', from one perspective.

Quoted for posterity.

[jackalope21]

well, if that comment was directed at the repercussions of the war, then i am cool with that

i read it as Europeans didn't think America had a role at all and coming from a military family where everyone in my grandparents family lost someone in that war, that kinda rubbed me the wrong way....i took it as trivializing our involvement when so many Americans died on foreign soil

[smokester]

well, if that comment was directed at the repercussions of the war, then i am cool with that

i read it as Europeans didn't think America had a role at all and coming from a military family where everyone in my grandparents family lost someone in that war, that kinda rubbed me the wrong way....i took it as trivializing our involvement when so many Americans died on foreign soil

That statement was lost on me a bit I fear?  Europe had 23,000,000 civilian casualties during WW2 and the Americas had 0?  Our tiny little nation alone, also lost a similar amount of military personel as the US - and as I have already mentioned, the US had to get involved in the Second Sino-Japanese War because of Japan's assault on Pearl Harbour, not because it wanted to stop Hitler.

[jackalope21]

That statement was lost on me a bit I fear?  Europe had 23,000,000 civilian casualties during WW2 and the Americas had 0?  Our tiny little nation alone, also lost a similar amount of military personel as the US - and as I have already mentioned, the US had to get involved in the Second Sino-Japanese War because of Japan's assault on Pearl Harbour, not because it wanted to stop Hitler.

because i wasn't talking about civilian casualties......

[smokester]

These are precisely the issues that Europeans may have with this film.  It was no secret that Roosevelt wanted no part of WW2 and who can blame him.  America wanted to "build" and didn't want to affect the "balance of power" in Europe - fair enough I suppose although Hitler was doing it by force.  When they did get involved it was always only going to be a matter of time before the allies won, which is what the British had imagined would happen at the beginning of the war.

It is all history now but I am not sure what Tarantino is trying to achieve by creating a fictional band of "American" Jewish commandos, that go about mutilating the Germans in order to bring the Third Reich to its knees?

[smokester]

Take it whichever way you want, that is, of course, your right.

I didn't attempt to trivialise anything - I was trying to explain something to you about our 'gratitude', or lack of it.

A hell of a lot more Europeans died resisting Hitler than did Americans (particularly civilians, as noted by smokes), and we (mostly civilians, as you will observe) are somehow expected to be grateful? I am not belittling the contribution of your soldiery, nor that of their equipment, but if you expect gratitude then you are looking in the wrong place.

"We'll come and help, but only on our terms, only if we are allowed to be in charge, only if we set the terms of closure, only if you pay us back when we go, and only if we get to rule the world thereafter" OK - you are right, we are ungrateful basterds. Just like the few surviving Iraqis, who are expected to be grateful for the imposition of a "democracy" that they didn't want, at the cost of a few hundred thousand of their men, women and children. Well, you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs, can you?

... and don't get me started on American WWII fiction.

Quoted as usual.