When I first watched this film when it was released I was rather disappointed. I felt that Tarantino had once again beaten into our skulls that he was a vastly superior cinephile then we could ever hope to be, as he has done in every film he has directed. I felt there was too much of a clash of styles and genres within the structure of the film and this was best exemplified within the score of the film. I have had the opportunity to re-watch the film several times over the last few weeks and am now re-examining where this film stands within the context of Tarantino's work. To me, there are three things in particular which are quite striking in this film, helping to raise it to the level of a masterwork for Tarantino.
The first aspect that stands out and impresses me is the cinematography that Tarantino and Robert Richardson craft and that can be added to some outstanding composition by Tarantino throughout the film. There are moments when the camera moves within this film that seemingly allow the camera to become a character itself within the narrative. For example, when Landa (Christoph Waltz) is visiting the LaPadite farmhouse there is a moment where the camera comes full circle around Landa and LaPadite. And then amazingly, it reverses course instantly. To me it feels as if there is a third character in the room and he is walking around the table listening to the characters conversation intently. At other times, the camera moves like it did in classical Hollywood films, with long crane shots pulling down within the scene allowing the camera to linger on a character and remain there. An example of this is again with Landa at the premiere of Nation's Pride as he spies Bridget Von Hammersmark (Diane Kruger) and proceeds down the steps to confront her. This entire shot is very reminiscent of the crane shot Hitchcock employs in Notorious (Hitchcock, 1944). Brilliant work.
This brings me to the second aspect that I feel makes this film stand out. I complained earlier that Tarantino beats his audience over the head regarding his standing as a cinephile. As I think about this two things occur to me. First, most of any audience are NOT cinephiles. So they don't realize that Tarantino is doing this. Secondly, this arrogance regarding film allows him to pay great homage to films from all periods. Based upon my sensibility for films and my overriding belief that most people making films today have forgotten what has come before makes this a good thing. I mean if he didn't do it, who would? Most people don't realize that Tarantino paid great respect to the worlds first dominant cinema, that of the Germans. That he paid tribute to UFA and it's greatest filmmaker Leni Reifenstahl. Or that he had a character within the film named Emil Jannings, perhaps the greatest actor of the German cinema. They don't know that when Landa puts his cigarette out in his pastry that is a copy of something Hitchcock did in To Catch a Thief (Hitchcock, 1954). Or when they discuss the extremely flammable film stock they show a clip of Sabotage (Hitchcock, 1936). All of this, which to me makes this work special, would be meaningless if Tarantino never did it, because really, who would?
The final thing that stands out in this film is another trait of Tarantino and that is his complete disregard for traditional narrative structure and his inherent belief within his work that his way is the right way. Tarantino destroys traditional narrative structure and this film is no exception. And having re-watched the film multiple times I now rather like the historical liberties he takes. He owns them and unapologetically crafts his narrative around these liberties. His narrative is inventive, at times touching, others thrilling and his dialogue is always crisp and intelligent. He deservedly received an Oscar nomination for writing.
As I said, at first this film upset me because I felt it could have been so much better, and also maybe I expected more from Tarantino. Time though has healed my wounds and made me see that I was wrong and that this film is a true masterwork, another in a line of such for Tarantino.
No comments:
Post a Comment