fountainhead777 Posted August 23, 2009 Report Share Posted August 23, 2009 (edited) To be honest I'm quite shocked and disappointed that people on this Objectivism forum are praising this film. But maybe so we can understand each other, someone could answer the following questions- 1. Could you please give an example of a (good) satire that used brutal violence against its subjects to ridicule them? And failing that, tell me how this film was good satire? 2. In the film the Nazis watch the Goebell's propoganda film 'National Pride' and they chuckle as allied soldiers get shot - because they are sadistic. So what exactly is the difference between Hitler and co. laughing at National Pride, and the real life audience laughing at the yet more brutal violence against the Nazi soldiers? 3. If I went to see a film composed mainly of racist jokes, would the fact of the jokes being clever/witty excuse the film and make it non-racist? And worthy of my praise? 1. Gargantua and Pantagruel, Don Quixote, A Tale of a Tub, and the Canterbury Tales 2. Because they are meant to feel pride at the killing of people fighting for freedom. Additionally the violence in that film is realistic and thus about the real world not a false one. 3. Who made every single racist joke? Let's see, was it members of the regime who conducted mass genocide on the basis of racism? It was? I wonder why that was? Maybe to demonstrate the end result of racism. Traditionally there are two schools of satire. One is called satyra which comes from the satyr, a half beast, half man being of mythology. Its emphasis was on the beast in man. Now think back to the movie. In the beginning you have Landa making the comparison of the wolves and rats to the Nazis and Jews respectively, reducing both groups to beasts and the attributes of beasts. Later on you have a racist propaganda officer, who engages in sexual acts with a mistress and ignores all who are not of his race in a tribal, animalistic fashion. Also the Basterds hunt and kill the Nazis as if they were animals to further the characterization of them as such. The movie was about how war and racism bring out the uncivilized animal in humans. They target and brutalize this and ridicule it as much as possible throughout the movie, thus satirizing it. It was a fairly correct satire although maybe not a good objectivist film because it depicted less than ideal beings often. Edited August 23, 2009 by fountainhead777 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.