I tend to trust Cannes selections more than films selected for any other film festival, and it seems that a lot of people on this board feel that way too.
The discussions about Inglourious Basterds on this site have talked mostly about how the trailer shows Tarantino recycling his standard violent kind of movie. But most people seem to be open to the idea of it being really good anyway.
Does its inclusion at Cannes hint that it may be more than “another Tarantino movie” or does Tarantino just have a way of getting into Cannes?
Just about any film Tarantino makes has a guaranteed slot at Cannes. This is probably the case with most filmmakers who have both won the Palme d’Or and acted as head of the Jury in the past, though Tarantino’s connections to the festival seem to also be on a deeper, more friendship-like level.
He actually announced that Inglorious Basterds would premire at Cannes 2009 when he was at the festival last year, before the film even started production.
yeah. it would be bad business for cannes to reject a past palme winner. thats a selective club.
i wasn’t sure about the politics involved at cannes
I hope it will be good. Frankly, I’ve pretty much liked everything Tarantino’s done (excluding his Four Rooms segment, although it had some charm…I guess), even considering Kill Bill and Jackie Brown to be masterpieces of a very high calibre. I don’t know, though. Looking at the trailer for Inglourious Basterds kinds of irks me a little, like I don’t really know what to expect. It seems like it’s going to be a comedy more than anything (although, of course, it will have a lot of action). Basically, I think, I really like Tarantino when his work is taken seriously by him.
“jackie brown” IS a masterpiece. “kill bill” is a great flawed film (on the strength of volume 2).
Love Tarentino, can’t wait for this film to come out.
I love his early work, and Pulp Fiction is one of my all time favourite movies. His post – Jackie Brown stuff has been pretty shitty if you ask me. I really don’t like how he’s turned out.
as mentioned before: since he was a jury member in 2004, and got the palme d’or in 1994 for pulp fiction, it wasn’t hard for him to get a slot at the fest. i’m sure that tarrantino’s appearance in cannes is importend a) for the festival – in order to gain attention the the fest (media, non-cinephils) b) for himself – to give his, lately mediocre work, a great kick-off. the fact that he has annonced that inglorious basterds would premire at cannes 2009 (approved by his selective cannes friends wich can’t have seen more than a couple of minutes during that state of production) seems to me that cannes finally beacame more about politics than art. nevertheless, the cannes film festival is still extremely important and maybe they’ll change their mind someday and rethink their positions. my two cents.
sheesh. give cannes and quentin a break. cannes is just a film festival, and “inglorious basterds” is just a film.
hahaha, well, that was some way of destroying our illusions and romanticism towards Cannes and Tarantino films.
Wow, I guess I just missed the boat with Tarantino. I understand that there is a huge following of his haters out there and I certainly don’t fall into that category, but I just can’t see how ANY of his films are worthy of a Palme d’ Or. It’s a French thing and It’s political. Plain and simple.