no glory here...they're just Basterds

I recently parttook in a rare occurrence for me nowadays: I saw a movie on opening night.

But not just any movie. A huge blockbuster movie.

A Tarantino movie.

Yes, after anticipating the tremendous struggle of trying to find someone to see Inglorious Basterds with, I got a fateful call from my girlfriend the afternoon of opening day, suddenly asking me if I wanted to see the movie being dubbed for Chosen People like me as "kosher porn." How could I say no?

So we went, and unlike Tarantino's last drab attempt with Death Proof, Basterds was an incredible film. Perhaps turning the crowd on its head with more sparsely distributed violence, leaving the viewer in a more tense state throughout, heightened the experience, and the injection of some tremendous humour (from Brad Pitt mostly) made it one of his best, no doubt.

And of course, the critical praise swarmed in for QT, calling it one of his best, a return to his originals, and praising him for seamlessly blending multiple languages beautifully into a rich narrative. They're even calling for head-Nazi Christoph Waltz to get a Best Supporting Actor nom.

But reading the news on IMDB (as I often do) on Saturday afternoon led me to an interesting headline: "Jewish Critics Chime In On Inglorious Basterds."

Now, I know the "kosher porn" thing may be taking it a bit too far...but how much could a Jewish writer have against an alternate-history narrative of Jews Gone Wild through Nazi-occupied Europe? How could any one of us never claim to use a time machine, if granted, for any purpose other than heading back to turn-of-the-century Austria to off little Hitler?

Well, apparently there are quite a few. Quite a few who see this film as nothing more than "Jewish revenge porn," "blathering, self-indulgent drivel," and "shockingly superficial."

One such critic even went as far as comparing the Basterds to al-Qaeda (sure...I'll bet Chemical Ali would love the sentiment of being compared to a Jew), as Tarantino evoked "today's real-life masters of cruelty and demoralization by atrocity." Sure. And The Dark Knight is representative of the failure of law enforcement to stop anthromorphic vigilante superheroes from running amok throughout America's fictional cities.

What's most shocking is how seriously they stick to the idea that Tarantino makes no attempt at outlining during the film that this is an alternate history of World War II...as if we are led to believe that Hitler wore a cape all the time, and really didn't die in the bunker, but at the hands of the guy who made Hostel. And while I'm sure some people out there may not know this is intended as a drastic work of historical fiction, and to believe a Tarantino work to be based on reality...well, I suppose then the "El Paso Wedding Chapel Massacre" really went down, and Christopher Walken did, in fact, once have a watch up his pooper.

And comparing them to al-Qaeda for spreading terror? For "mastering cruelty and demoralization?" Hmm, it seems to me that Jews in that time may have been driven to violence by another group known for their cruel, demoralizing atrocities, no?

It's a fucking movie, you fools. Just because its based on the Nazis does not obligate every filmmaker to do as much research as Spielberg. If the intention is to capture the past, then obviously, do the research you need. But if its meant for fiction? Tarantino should have as much free creative reign to bend the timelines of history as Bloodsucking Nazi Zombies.

And stop using yo mama's Jewish guilt to try and make every other Jewish person feel guilty for buying into this...we know it just as well as you do, bubbie. We may be buying into "crap"...but we know it's "crap," in that its not real. We know how the real, tragic story went down, and many of us (myself included) have a personal connection to the horrors of the Holocaust. And we know that Inglorious Basterds in no way reflects that.

So quit whining about how it makes us look bad, about how it reflects badly on our people and our history. Because while its cast may be stocked with our people, it certainly is not stocked with much real history.

save the whiners!

So its been a while since my last post, but as the summer heat starts to simmer over the East Coast (to cover those days when pending tornadoes or hurricanes just don't "do it"), tempers are flaring up over attack ads that have started to get more and more prevalent. Two such ads have come into the spotlight this past week:

First comes this ad from the consumer-friendly folks at PETA, who unveiled this in the buffet-happy community of Jacksonville, Florida. The argument stems over whether the message, encouraging folks to go vegetarian to live healthier, slimmer lifestyles, is really as well-meaning as PETA claims to intend it is, or whether it is an attack ad against overweight people.

The second ad comes from closer to home, as Coors Light is under fire in Canada for releasing these ads in British Columbia, to take shots at Torontonians like myself to sell beer. Many complaints swamped Coors' PR inboxes over the past week, as many tourists in B.C., mostly Torontonians, were hit with the ad straight on while on vacation. (Ironically enough, this ad was created by DraftFCB, based in...you guessed it, Toronto!)


Now, not to dwell on the individual effects of either, but more to bring up a general topic: should these sort of mocking ads ever see the light of day? Are attack ads meant to go beyond the political spectrum, and attack individuals based on very general topics, like their body type or city of residence?

Why? Why not?

The best ads are meant to push the edge...whether its "Daisy" for a Presidential nominee, "1984" for a Mac desktop, or Paris Hilton hawking a double-cheeseburger, shock appeal is what sticks in your head. Why the media acts so surprised that companies and agencies are still willing to push the envelope today is perhaps the only real shock left from these developments.

And unlike taking unwarranted shots at their subjects, like recent anti-Obama ads that have targeted him as being a Socialist, Fascist and Hollywood Elitist all at the same time, what the ads suggest are not so far fetched. Sure, people have free will, but is recommending a salad in such bad taste (no pun intended)? And while I am a proud Torontonian, any walk down Yonge Street on a busy Saturday will bring out some questionable language in people, and surely we could polish up on our intrapersonal skills every once in a while. There's a reason we pride ourselves on being the New York of the North, people!

Just stop getting so worked up, people! We're in the middle of a recession, stuck in a neverending war, and Glenn Beck is still talking...is this really the worst we've got to deal with!?!