View Full Version : Tarantino's 'Inglorious ************'?
brunny78
12-09-2003, 18:26
Is Tarantino's planned fifth feature going to be a remake of italian filmmaker Enzo G. Castellari's 1977 film of the same name, plot wise they sound decidedly similar?
father_christmas
12-09-2003, 19:21
so what's it gonna be about ? sounds interesting so far ..
danielzavitz
12-09-2003, 21:13
all i know is he 'wrote' the script before kill bill and superficially there seem to be some similarities. there aren't many details around for the script (that i know of) but i haven't heard it called a remake officially, but then tarantino has been known to half inch the odd idea or two:D
new forms
12-09-2003, 21:14
and i think its a WWII film
Disappearer
12-09-2003, 21:24
It's supposed to be his Dirty Dozen style movie.
LooNaTiK
12-09-2003, 21:30
its not based on the original 'inglorious ************' as far as i know, but uses the same name coz it's so damn cool :)
LooN
brunny78
13-09-2003, 07:43
Originally posted by LooNaTiK
its not based on the original 'inglorious ************' as far as i know, but uses the same name coz it's so damn cool :)
LooN
the fact that they're both self proclaimed dirty dozen rip-offs is merely a coincidence then?
monkeyman
13-09-2003, 20:14
Ive got the old Hokushin tape of Inglorious ************,and its a superb flick.Tarantino describes his film as being a "guys go on a mission " film,which is EXACTLY what Castellaris potboiler is!!
Now if someone could get round to remaking Castellaris Bronx Warriors.....
dazedandconfused
13-09-2003, 22:28
sure i read somewhere that adam sandler was going to be in this, along with michael madsen and the usual tarantino players
brunny78
14-09-2003, 10:52
Originally posted by monkeyman
Now if someone could get round to remaking Castellaris Bronx Warriors.....
is bronx warriors actually worth watching? i like "bad" films and was debating buying this one a while back but was told it was beyond bad
monkeyman
14-09-2003, 15:40
Originally posted by brunny78
is bronx warriors actually worth watching? i like "bad" films and was debating buying this one a while back but was told it was beyond bad
Its great fun.Any film where Vic Morrow is told "any more mistakes and its your head"(his next film was Twilight Zone!!) has got to be worth a watch!
I believe Tarantino has been intending to do a "guys on a mission" movie for many years - he states this in the 1994 Omnibus programme about him - and I guess this is his stab at it. He also said that the best ever such film was "Where Eagles Dare".
Arch Stanton
14-09-2003, 21:46
Betthey change the title before release though.
Can't imagine they'll let them use '************' on TV/Poster ads.
Andrew WK
15-09-2003, 08:14
Wonder how many parts this one's gonna come in? ;)
Andrew WK
28-05-2008, 12:57
An update!
Quentin Tarantino has revealed that he is aiming to bring his next film, World War II drama Inglorious ********, to the 2009 Cannes Film Festival.
Speaking to Le Grand Journal at this year's festival, the Pulp Fiction director said: "The next movie I'm doing is my World War II movie Inglorious ********.
"I actually just finished the first draft of the script and when I get home I'll be finishing it up… and if all goes well, I will be here in 2009 at Cannes with my war film Inglorious ********!"
Michael Madsen is reportedly attached to star in the film, which follows a group of US soldiers facing execution by firing squad. The soldiers are given the chance to redeem themselves by going on a dangerous mission in Nazi-occupied France.
Tarantino first started work on the Inglorious ******** script after the 1997 release of Jackie Brown.
SIMON ADEBISI
28-05-2008, 13:00
Read this yesterday too. Load of ********. Id be amazed if it happens that quickly.
Spooky_uk
28-05-2008, 13:16
reckon this should be bumped across to the Movie Discussion Forum.
He started work on the script in 1997 and has only finished the first draft in 2008...
I wonder how fat Mr Blonde will be by the time it starts shooting.
Mr Majestik
28-05-2008, 14:52
Great, five men in a tank talking about Glen Miller records for two hours.
Great, five men in a tank talking about Glen Miller records for two hours.
With no shoes and socks on :lol:
gjkendall
28-05-2008, 15:01
Great, five men in a tank talking about Glen Miller records for two hours.
:lol:
Would anyone back a Tarantino film financially now after his string of flops, and no you can't include German tax break schemes.
Mr Majestik
28-05-2008, 15:14
Would anyone back a Tarantino film financially now after his string of flops, and no you can't include German tax break schemes.
I wouldn't exactly call 1 film a string of flops. Kill Bill made plenty of money.
Tarantino had a pretty amazing run of films, I would only call his last a flop.
SIMON ADEBISI
28-05-2008, 15:18
Did Kill Bill 2 do well?
Great, five men in a tank talking about Glen Miller records for two hours.
Funniest post in ages.
Personally, I think QT should just do as he says and get it written up, shot, edited and at Cannes by this time next year. It seems it's just going to be one indulgent movie injoke and probably doesn't deserve any more time spent (if any at all).
I wouldn't exactly call 1 film a string of flops. Kill Bill made plenty of money.
Insert turkeys for flops then. I'm not getting into the whole Jackie Brown argument but to my mind he's only made two good films.
DrVenkman
31-05-2008, 13:27
And that's why someone's personal preference doesn't count for anything in Hollywood. Regardless of what you think of his films, only one has under performed, so all in all he's still got a pretty good track record.
I'll believe it when I see it.
I think this 'announcement' is more along the lines of "Hey, I'm in Cannes & nobody's paying any attention to me & my enormous chin - I better say something to the press to get the focus on me. Look at me! Look at me!"
Not that I'm at all cynical about Tarantino & his proclamations about what his next film will be. Oh no. :oh-hum:
;)
Did Kill Bill 2 do well?
Yes.
Budget $30 million USD
Gross revenue $152,159,461
cliff homewood
31-05-2008, 17:45
two underperformed if you count four rooms.
bollecks
31-05-2008, 17:45
Would anyone back a Tarantino film financially now after his string of flops, and no you can't include German tax break schemes.
Grindhouse is probably the only loss making film he's ever done.
Also probably the only truly bad film he's ever done so maybe there's justice in the world after all!
two underperformed if you count four rooms.
Broke even and he's only 1/4 of that. Clutching at straws? ;) The Tarantino part was good 'un all if I recall correctly. It was the finger chop/Zippo story.
anephric
01-06-2008, 00:38
It was alright. Rodriguez's was much better. Proto-Grindhouse!
DrVenkman
02-06-2008, 07:58
I actually liked both the Rodriquez and Tarantino segment in that film. It's the other 2 that are godawful. Particulary the one with the Witches.
Harry over at AICN says Tarantion's Inglorious ******** will be split in two like Kill Bill. Anyone else fed up with the split of his films? Why can't we just have ONE film?
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/37149
marshy2004
20-06-2008, 08:20
Harry over at AICN says Tarantion's Inglorious ******** will be split in two like Kill Bill. Anyone else fed up with the split of his films? Why can't we just have ONE film?
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/37149
In theory, I don't have a problem with it at all - if there's 4 hours+ of good stuff in the script, why not split it into two films? Yes, moan moan, you'll have to wait to see what happens, moan moan, you'll have to get off your butt and go to the cinema twice and you'll have to pay twice...but so what, don't you WANT to go back to the cinema and see a continuation of a story you've enjoyed so far? Sequels, anyone?
And besides, if the first part ends on a belter of a cliffhanger/revelation as Kill Bill did, what's to complain about?
Of course, if it's just a case of QT being/having a bad editor, then fair enough - but if he's saying it'll be two films at this stage, then I think making that arguement is a little redundant.
Bring on the ********, I say.
Mr Majestik
20-06-2008, 09:00
Great, five men in a tank talking about Glen Miller records for four hours.
Great, five men in a tank talking about Glen Miller records for four hours.
I see what you did there ........ and I like it! :D
Andrew WK
09-07-2008, 12:52
Pitt in talks for Tarantino's '********'
Wednesday, July 9 2008, 10:33 BST
By Simon Reynolds, Entertainment Reporter
Brad Pitt is in talks to take the lead role in Quentin Tarantino's war movie Inglorious ********, according to Deadline Hollywood Daily.
The film, which revolves around a group of soldiers stranded behind enemy lines in World War II, will commence shooting in Europe this October on an accelerated production schedule. Tarantino is hoping to premiere the movie at next year's Cannes Film Festival.
The Weinstein Company is looking to co-finance the project with a major Hollywood studio - Universal, Paramount, Warner Bros and Sony are reportedly looking at the script - in exchange for foreign rights.
Lawrence Bender, a producer on all of Tarantino's films, will oversee the project.
Pitt has previously appeared in a small role in the Tarantino-scripted True Romance. He can next be seen in the Coen brothers comedy Burn After Reading, released this October.
Mr Majestik
09-07-2008, 13:17
Intresting that the Weinsteins arn't putting up the money this time.
As long as it's not going to be self indulgent cack like his last one....two.....three.
DrVenkman
10-07-2008, 21:48
Quite unbelieveably, it's a 'Jewsplotaion' movie. Being that the crew are all Jewish.
Or, according to AICN
Basically - it's a story about an all Jewish American unit sent behind the lines into Nazi Occupied France with the mission to kill as many Nazis and cause as much trouble as humanly possible.
It's also about a girl that saw her family killed that finds a home and a life as a theater operator in Nazi Occupied Paris.
Forget about remakes, the original just got released on a stunning triple discer in the US and never looked so good:
Those Inglorious Fellows of Unclear Parentage (http://mondo-esoterica.net/Inglorious%20************.html)
I recommend anyone looking for an all out action war film without any need for a message or anti-war overtone, pick this up straight away.
BeauBrummie
28-07-2008, 20:50
I've just ordered this yesterday - yeah .... :clap:
Universal will be backing Tarantino's latest:
http://www.thehollywoodnews.com/artman2/publish/movie_news/Universal-to-make-Quentin-Tarantino-s-new-movie-11290708.php
The article claims shooting starts this fall - wow. that's pretty damn quick!
TwistedPixels
31-07-2008, 20:20
wow I cannot wait and see how this one unfolds it should be amazing
SIMON ADEBISI
31-07-2008, 20:29
I love how loads of sites are suddenly in love with the original version. Its crap. Its like ******* Kellys Heroes for **** sake :lol:
DrVenkman
31-07-2008, 21:21
Yes but it's actually very well made.
I saw it as a bit of an 'oddity' a few years back, though as it turns out it's not that odd. It's more 'Dirty Dozen' surely though?
I love how loads of sites are suddenly in love with the original version. Its crap. Its like ******* Kellys Heroes for **** sake :lol:
What's wrong with Kelly's Heroes? It's a classic. :shrug:
SIMON ADEBISI
31-07-2008, 21:26
The Dirty Dozen is way better.
The Kellys Heros comparison was probably off but like KH is it has lighthearted scenes like the skinnydipping and like KH they mow down at least 4000 krauts with no hassle.
Variety confirms that Eli Roth has joined the cast:
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117990111.html?categoryid=13&cs=1
Great bit of casting, Tarantino really stretching his wings there:rolleyes:
Pitt and DiCaprio are rumored, and the first announcment is Roth:P
Mr Majestik
06-08-2008, 11:34
The DiCaprio rumours already been shot down.
On the brightside it stops Roth from making any more of his own movies for a while.
Roth's like Tarantino, they should both be prevented from acting... ever... fullstop!
DrVenkman
06-08-2008, 14:54
I think Roth handles acting duties way better than Tarantino does. He doesn't over exaggerate everything for a start (Though I concede that he was suitably slimy in 'From Dusk Til Dawn')
DiCaprio seems a little too serious to be in a film like this. But QT is going for a German actor in that part now. The only lead that seems definite apart from Roth is Pitt, and I'd be suprised if he doesn't take it.
Hell, he should just make the film with the whole 'Oceans' cast instead.
Mr Majestik
07-08-2008, 08:45
The temp from the US version of the Office as been offically cast.
I think Roth handles acting duties way better than Tarantino does.
Your honour, I present 2001 Maniacs and Cabin Fever as exhibits 1 and 2. The prosecution rests.
Despite Tarantino's recent awful recent CV, I'm actually a little hopeful that this may be worth seeing...
SIMON ADEBISI
07-08-2008, 10:12
:lol: I see we can say ************ now!
Mr Majestik
07-08-2008, 10:40
Despite Tarantino's recent awful recent CV, I'm actually a little hopeful that this may be worth seeing...
Strangely, me too. The leaked script reviews make it sound quite promising.
thejetsons
08-08-2008, 09:18
Simon Pegg, Nastassja Kinski and David Krumholtz are in talks to join the cast of Quentin Tarantino's Inglorious ************, reports Variety.
It has been confirmed that Brad Pitt will take on the role of Aldo Raine, with Eli Roth and B.J. Novak also expected to join the cast.
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/movies/a120479/three-more-in-talks-for-************.html
GProject
09-08-2008, 00:15
Simon Pegg, Nastassja Kinski and David Krumholtz are in talks to join the cast of Quentin Tarantino's Inglorious ************, reports Variety.
It has been confirmed that Brad Pitt will take on the role of Aldo Raine, with Eli Roth and B.J. Novak also expected to join the cast.
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/movies/a120479/three-more-in-talks-for-************.html
Having been catching bits about the casting rumours over the past few days.
It's funny how commenters were saying "what, Eli Roth, the director?", when he's actually got more feature acting experience than B.J. Novak (a writer / stand-up / actor) at this point.
It's an odd mix, I'll give them that.
More odd casting:
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117990590.html?categoryid=13&cs=1
More odd casting:
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117990590.html?categoryid=13&cs=1
:eek:
gjkendall
15-08-2008, 07:07
More odd casting:
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117990590.html?categoryid=13&cs=1
Will it be a Scottish character?;)
wakeupjake
15-08-2008, 09:28
Will it be a Scottish character?;)
Apparently its the role of "British General Ed Fench, a military genius who assists in the film's plot to wipe out Nazi leaders."
Source: http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=23086
More odd casting:
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117990590.html?categoryid=13&cs=1
WHY???
Mr Majestik
15-08-2008, 14:19
WHY???
It's only one scene and Myers was pretty decent playing straight in 54.
The wonderful Samm Levine from "Freaks and Geeks" is rumored to have joined the cast:
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/37956
joconnor
16-08-2008, 10:28
WHY???
I remember saying the same thing when I heard John Travolta was in Pulp Fiction.
SIMON ADEBISI
16-08-2008, 11:32
The wonderful Samm Levine from "Freaks and Geeks" is rumored to have joined the cast:
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/37956
:D The most jewish character ever. He was so good in F&G.
Myers?? Maybe if he isnt trying and failing to be funny he might be ok.
BeauBrummie
18-08-2008, 20:46
Pitt And Tarantino Face Backlash For War Film
18 August 2008 9:05 AM, PDT
Brad Pitt and Quentin Tarantino are facing a possible backlash for their forthcoming World War II film Inglorious ************, which depicts violent attacks on German soldiers.
The movie - Tarantino's remake of a 1978 Italian film - reportedly stars Pitt as a U.S. Army lieutenant who leads a group of Jewish-Americans dropped into Nazi-occupied Europe to seek revenge.
A leaked quote from the script, obtained by the New York Post, reveals Pitt's character barking at soldiers: "Every man under my command owes me 100 Nazi scalps, and y'all will git (get) me 100 Nazi scalps, taken from the heads of 100 dead Nazis, or die trying."
And critics believe the film's portrayal of German characters, in addition to the violent events, will spark outrage amongst German citizens.
According to a report by The Times of London: "It is not just the scalping, or the carving of swastikas in foreheads, or the shooting of a German officer's testicles, or the slow strangling scene - all shown with Tarantino's customary love of detail - that is likely to upset the German nation and its critics.
"It is the whole idea of turning the Second World War into a comic-book adventure in which not a single German character has redeeming value."
In a recent interview, Tarantino said: "I don't want it to feel like a period film. This is a modern, in-your-face movie."
He has not commented on reports of the leaked script.
So no outrage at all, just presumed?
Do people really think this will be even close to a realistic movie? I can't see potential poor box office in Germany stopping QT, and it may even do good business there if people go to see what all the fuss is about.
Quincunx
18-08-2008, 22:46
I don't care if it's realistic, I just want a fully formed film with a consistant tone rather than a compilation of favourite scenes from war films.
GProject
18-08-2008, 22:53
The wonderful Samm Levine from "Freaks and Geeks" is rumored to have joined the cast:
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/37956
Indeed, although as that article suggests, there will be no David Krumholtz, and as this article suggests (http://www.firstshowing.net/2008/08/16/greg-mottola-directing-nick-frost-and-simon-peggs-next-film/), there will be no Simon Pegg either.
I don't care if it's realistic, I just want a fully formed film with a consistant tone rather than a compilation of favourite scenes from war films.
Sorry, my comment was a reply to the supposed potential outrage more than a critique of the style.
Quincunx
18-08-2008, 23:12
Sorry, my comment was a reply to the supposed potential outrage more than a critique of the style.
Oh I know, i just wanted to get that off my chest :)
"It is the whole idea of turning the Second World War into a comic-book adventure in which not a single German character has redeeming value."
and this is a bad thing ? :shrug:
This is one big fat RUMOUR but the folks over at AICN report that Ennio Morricone has been approached to score the soundtrack:
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/39041
I saw Morricone in London a few years ago (think it was Hammersmith). The greatest film-composer ever in my book.
AICN confirms Morricone's involvement (to a certain extent):
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/39148
Nevertheless a new film by QT with an original score by Morricone? That sure sounds like movie heaven to me....
It's got an official US release date - 21 August 2009:
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/39633
hookbeak
01-01-2009, 12:47
if the Germans are going to be offended by it, perhaps they shouldn't have murdered half of Europe.
eye__writ
01-01-2009, 13:05
if the Germans are going to be offended by it, perhaps they shouldn't have murdered half of Europe.
They didn't, some of their ancestors did. :wave:
Not that I think the makers should worry about causing offence, but to say their right to be offended is waived by the history of their country is daft. The English would never be allowed to complain again if our history was taken into account.
joconnor
01-01-2009, 14:19
They didn't, some of their ancestors did. :wave:
Ancestors makes it sound like it happened 100s of years ago. I pretty sure there are a lot of them alive today.
I think Germans, as a rule, are quite happy to see the Nazi's as something completely seperate from nationality, and rightly so, so I can't really see there being any offence caused anyway.
Lets get rid of the asterisks as it appears that the title is now "Inglorious Basterds"
cliff homewood
01-01-2009, 23:09
according to that aicn link its inglourious basterds. It's either that or soemone doesn't know how to spell inglorious.
joconnor
02-01-2009, 00:18
It's either that or soemone doesn't know how to spell inglorious.
It's a highly contagious disease it seems.
Or should I say disaese
cliff homewood
02-01-2009, 10:17
indede
could we get rid of this stooopid spelling of, Basterds indeed! Replace the offending 'a' with a skull, everyone's happy.
joconnor
02-01-2009, 11:43
could we get rid of this stooopid spelling of, Basterds indeed! Replace the offending 'a' with a skull, everyone's happy.
Nooo I have one of those old keyboards that doesn't have a skull key.
It's Wall-E all over again.
I mean on the publicity material, not the forum!! :D
So when is the title of a movie in context even if it's swearing or not and when should a forum excercise some common sense and maturity?
SIMON ADEBISI
04-01-2009, 22:49
Obviously you didnt notice the influx of ************ as soon as the word became unasterisked :lol:
joconnor
05-01-2009, 12:35
I have always found it weird that ******* is censored yet cocksucker is perfectly acceptable :lol:
This is NOT a forum issue, it's a stupid movie title. Basterds indeed!
Coolhand
05-01-2009, 14:05
Can we give Tarantino a black mark for deliberately bypassing the autocensor?
Coupled with a black mark for both eps of Kill Bill does that mean we can finally ban Quentin?
Mr Majestik
05-01-2009, 16:13
Aparantly there's another 15 minute bar room scene in this one.
He should definatly get a warning for that.
Aparantly there's another 15 minute bar room scene in this one.
He should definatly get a warning for that.
Will this be in Part 1 or Part 2...
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.