Do they get tired of being portrayed as the ultimate evil? Or are they like the Confederates in the US civil war -just on the wrong side somewhat resigned to a bad rap but guilty enough to put up with it. Confederates certainly weren't as bad a Nazis and their death camps but if I was a German I would get sick of seeing movies decrying Germans as warmongers and worthy of ultimate hate.
share[deleted]
This movie doesn't portray them as the ultimate evil. It portrays them as goofs.
Just as goofy as the entire Third Reich's 1000 year empire dream- an impossibility.
For one, the confederate army and the flag were representations of slavery and hatred, as that's what they were fighting for, to keep slavery alive in its traditional form, and still holds its victims down in chains today, cotton fields were concentration camps, where your wife could be raped in your face and your children killed or taken away before you were beat to a pulp and forced to work in a field again.
Both were bad events. As to the Germans you speak of, they have no affiliation with Nazi's, they refer to them as Nazi's, only individuals may harbor feelings, and we call them Nazi's, as the ideal still remains. So if you're talking about German citizens you are clearly mistaken.
If I'm not mistake the Civil War was about states rights, not slavery. It wasn't until Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation in 1863 that it became about slavery. Most Confederates were poor and thought it was about regional oppression from the north that had a side issue regarding the economics involved in slavery.
The entire German population adored Hitler and his belief system so I don't know what you mean when you say the Germans had no affiliation with them.
If you actually pay attention to IG it shows the Nazi's as sophisticated, smart, honorable, witty, cunning, outwitting the Americans/French, nice in some cases, and in many cases innocent and not deserving of what they get from the Basterds where the Americans are portrayed as backwards, unsophisticated, not very smart, sadistic, brutal, outwitted by the Germans/Nazi's. It portrays the British soldier as sophisticated and smart but also with a temper and too big of an ego which gets him and half the Basterds caught and then killed.
shareYou are mistaken. The politicians who made the decision to secede explicitly cited preservation of slavery as reason number one for secession.
shareYes but the southern people who fought the war had a different reason. Preservation of regional identity. Slavery held nothing financially for them.
shareLol "Slavery held nothing financially for them". You got to be kidding...
The evidence is clear that Slavery was the single most important cause of the civil war on both sides. All the historians looking at the historical documents have come to that consensus.
Seriously do some research.
I don't think you made your statement broad enough; do make it broader.
share"If I'm not mistake the Civil War was about states rights, not slavery."
You are totally mistaken. The Civil War was never about states rights. That whole thing is a rather recent invention in that it started a long time after the civil war was over. When you get down to it, it's another attempt by people to rewrite history so that they don't look to be so bad in modern times.
It wasn't until Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation in 1863 that it became about slavery. Most Confederates were poor and thought it was about regional oppression from the north that had a side issue regarding the economics involved in slavery.
Indeed, it was about states' rights.....to keep slaves.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcy7qV-BGF4
You are mistaken. The North's goal initially was to preserve the union, however the goal of the South was to preserve slavery. So slavery was definitely the cause of the war. The South's desperate attempt to preserve it at all cost. Its in many of the southern states Declarations of Succession. They feared losing their slaves if the balance between slave holding and non-slave holding states were disrupted. So although the North did not initially fight the war for the noble cause of ending slavery and made that a goal later on with the Emancipation Proclamation, the South specifically enter the war for the ignoble goal of preserving slavery.
http://www.civilwar.org/education/history/primarysources/declarationofcauses.html
The Civil War was about states rights, not slavery. Just sadly slavery was about of the states rights. Actually read about history, you will learn something. The British invented the concentration camps, the Nazis just did it on a much bigger scale.
The nazis didn't call themselves Nazis, that is actually a derogatory term for them that stuck around. They called themselves National Socialists. The official party name was the Nation Socialist German Workers Party.
The Civil War was about states rights, not slavery. Just sadly slavery was about of the states rights.The Civil War being about "States Right" is nothing more than propaganda that has been hoisted over history as a tent to allow the Confederate states a position of righteousness in a war that was nothing more than treason.
I approve this message!share
For one, the confederate army and the flag were representations of slavery and hatred, as that's what they were fighting for, to keep slavery alive in its traditional form, and still holds its victims down in chains today
No, he learned history from reading the preamble to every secessionist constitution.
I know it's not politically correct to say that the Civil War was about slavery. It doesn't make it any less true.
Janet! Donkeys!
For one, the confederate army and the flag were representations of slavery and hatred, as that's what they were fighting for, to keep slavery alive in its traditional form, and still holds its victims down in chains today, cotton fields were concentration camps, where your wife could be raped in your face and your children killed or taken away before you were beat to a pulp and forced to work in a field again.
There's a saying that goes "if you can't do the time then don't do the crime".
Yes, not ALL Germans were Nazis, at no point in human history an entire nation was of one mind on any subject. The fact that a majority VOTED for the Nazis, TWICE, before they made themselves a dictatorship AND the fact that for 12 years there were no serious attempts to rid Germany of that dictatorship speaks volumes though. A clear majority was in accord with the Nazi regime and those who were not did nothing to change that.
So, in the end, for at least those 12 years, the distinction between Nazi and German had little, if any, meaning.
Can you refer to any films depicting Germans as monsters/murderers/warmongers/absolutely evil outside that period?
Cute and cuddly boyz!!
I can refer to a film depicting Germans as monstrous, evil terrorists and from 1988, set in that time period. Die Hard. Although for the German release, the terrorists were redefined as European.
_______
The sun is shining... but the ice is slippery.
did you actually watch Die Hard? it was simple mercenaries, they wanted to appear to be terrorists, but they were really just stealing money. not only that, they weren't all German either, there was an American black guy in that group as their head tech guy. The main guy and two others (the two blond brothers) were German for sure, but this wasn't some nationalist terror deal.
shareI can refer to a film depicting Germans as monstrous, evil terrorists
Actually, prior to the dictatorship, the German people never voted in the majority for the Nazis.
In July 1932 they received ~37% of the vote.
In November 1932 they received ~33% of the vote.
Hitler was appointed Chancellor in January 1933.
And then, in the tainted election of March 1933, they still only managed ~44% of the vote.
They then took the novel step of outlawing all the other parties. That did wonders for their share of the vote.
Maybe you should educate urself, it's pretty easy to find the info you seek, if you want to find it that is and not live in a bubble, here il get you started and you can click on the link if you want.
"In 1922, a loaf of bread cost 163 marks.
By September 1923, this figure had reached 1,500,000 marks and at the peak of hyperinflation, November 1923, a loaf of bread cost 200,000,000,000 marks
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/modern-world-history-1918-to-1980/weimar-germany/hyperinflation-and-weimar-germany/
if I was a German I would get sick of seeing movies decrying Germans as warmongers and worthy of ultimate hate.
But the Nazis are worthy of ultimate hate and were warmongers.That's why it's alright to pump your fist and have an orgasm when a theater of them is gunned down in slow motion in a movie.
Well, as you can expect, a controlled media and academia follow orders. So there is basically no criticism, even when someone makes a movie that glorifies people who torture and murder of captured German soldiers (not Gestapo or black SS-men, by the way,) and portrays their acts as something that is not only good, but also funny. Young people, who have suffered from an incessant onslaught of de-humanization of their ancestors by politicians, media, and schools, laugh about this. They do not realize what the message is, even when Tarantino spells it out in another movie:
"Killing white folks and getting paid for it, what's not to like?"
But I'm not sure brainwashing can really explain the phenomenon of people promoting movies that entice others to torture and kill them. Maybe white people are not as intelligent as their average IQ suggests. Well, Tarantino must be happy as people are indeed living out his "revenge" fantasies in real life. He must be chuckling when he sees pictures of tortured, raped, and murdered white farmers in South Africa, for example. What could give a man more satisfaction than the death and suffering of his own kin?
So you have a conspiracy that the media and academia are controlled... but by whom? Let me guess – "the Jews"? Wouldn't that be ironic, considering which movie we're talking about here?
I don't think the killing and torture of German soldiers in this movie was supposed to be seen as funny or good. I didn't watch it with anyone else, but I certainly wasn't laughing. I saw it as brutal and sadistic. Yes, it was done by the "good guys", but I think it was included to show how much the Germans were hated, and what war makes people capable of. And of course, it was all done in Tarantino's trademark tongue-in-cheek style. The message of this is clear to me: we need to be able to make light of serious events. People like watching controversial comedians for exactly the same reason.
I don't understand your obsession with race. Yes, a lot of Tarantino's movies have racial themes, but in case you didn't notice, this movie was filled with white people killing other white people. And the white people being killed were nearly all Nazis. Stop trying to see motives that just aren't there.
You really went off the deep end when you started talking about how Tarantino must enjoy seeing real-life violence. Like I said, movies about serious events help us to cope with reality. It's not true that whoever makes or enjoys such movies would enjoy seeing it happen in real life. People, in general, are not psychopaths. Right now you're sounding about as respectable as those idiots in the 90s who used to claim that video games were linked to real-life violence. Movies (and video games) do not "entice" people to torture and kill others. They are an entertainment medium. If they have any other effect on you, you're not safe to be walking the streets.
What conspiracy theory are you talking about? First off, do you doubt the existence of conspiracies? Second, does it always take some movie-style conspiracy for one group to control others? I guess these questions are easily answered.
As to Hollywood, can there even be a question that there is an ominous dominance by a certain group? http://articles.latimes.com/2008/dec/19/opinion/oe-stein19
Do you know of a Hollywood movie with a Jewish villain?
"I don't think the killing and torture of German soldiers in this movie was supposed to be seen as funny or good."
What else is is supposed to be then? It's a comedy where Jews take their 'justified' revenge against German soldiers.
My obsession with race? I'm not the one making racist propaganda movies.
"Movies (and video games) do not "entice" people to torture and kill others."
You think that propaganda has no effect? Seriously? They can't be used to fuel hatred of one group against another one?
Revenge porn is an appropriate term for the kind of movies Tarantino makes. It's all about vicariously enjoying killing people. I think that's scary. I'd be interested to know what brain researches have to say about this, after all, aren't the same areas in the brain activated when you see someone eating a banana and when you're actually eating one?
I'm generally very skeptical of conspiracy theories. The only one I have ever taken remotely seriously is that the government is spying on us, and that turned out to be true in a big way.
Why is the dominance of a certain group in Hollywood necessarily "ominous"? Could it possibly be that Jews are genetically predisposed to be more creative than other ethnicities? If IQ is heritable, surely other traits could be too. Would you say that the over-representation of gays in Hollywood and other arts is also ominous? Most of the time, there is a perfectly good explanation for the way things are.
For one ethnic group to control others, they would need to have a near-100% dominance in the media and entertainment industry. Otherwise, they would have to get members of other groups to work with them for the same purpose, and no conspiracy theorist has ever been able to explain to me why people would be complicit in so-called propaganda against their own people (which would include Tarantino himself, of course).
I'm not good of thinking of movies on the spot, but I'm sure if you Googled "movies with Jewish villains", you'd get an answer to that question.
I assume you're aware that not all movies hold your hand, leaving certain things morally ambiguous, and letting you make up your own mind about what was good or bad, justified or unjustified. To claim that the Jews' actions in this movie were justified is to put your own spin on it. Tarantino always glorifies violence, but in this movie it seemed particularly brutal to me because he went out of his way to depict the German soldiers as human, and arguably more intelligent than the Americans.
This is not a racist propaganda movie, and the fact that you see it as such shows your obsession with race. Of course propaganda can be used to fuel the hatred of one group against another, if done correctly by a government. We've seen that's possible. But it has to be constant, targeted, and omnipresent. One Tarantino movie every few years, that people voluntarily pay to see, cannot be classed as propaganda.
Regarding psychological research, I'm much more familiar with studies done on the link between video games and violence because that's more my area of interest, but I am aware that the overwhelming scientific consensus is that entertainment of any kind is not associated with an increase in violent behavior. With that said, it's probably true that we vicariously enjoy entertainment depicting violence and other primal urges, because as you say, it gives the corresponding areas of the brain – which normally have to be suppressed – an acceptable outlet.
As for how Tarantino's movies should be classified, I'm sure not many people would argue with the term "violence porn", but it's superfluous to include the word "revenge", as that is a common trope in many movies. One of the most common plot devices in any kind of entertainment is for the protagonist(s) to be wronged in some way, causing them to set out on a quest of putting things right. As usual, Tarantino takes this to extremes, but that doesn't imply any conspiracy exists, or that his movies are propaganda.
Are you retarded?
Honestly, start to make a difference between a movie made for entertainment (because we all know that in hollywood... Violence sells) and REALLY thinking this way. Tarantino has a twisted mind, there is not doubt about it. Does it make him a psycho? If he murders someone one day well then we will be able to call him such. For now, he is just making movies and has a lot of fun doing them just like i have a lot of fun watching them.
I am not even a violence goof. To be honest, a movie that has nothing more to offert than violence is hurtful to watch imo. But Tarantino's movies are subtle and artistic. He has so much more to show that only "people murdering other people for fun". He takes time to make impressive practical effects instead of using cgis. His dialogues are nothing less than an narratibe adventure every time. His characters are almost always interessting and complex. The guy doesn't just make movies for the sake of making money. He invest his heart in it.
If all you see in Inglourious Basterds is a "revenge tale" where the director is promoting "people torturing other people", please, get the fuck out of this board.
...on the main topic of how Germans see World War II, I don't think they give it much thought on their every-day lives. It is like asking Americans about the Japanese internment camps, McCarthyism or the Red Scare (the recent "Bridge of Spies", for example).
I'm going to guess that the Germans probably see it like we do: in a historical context, but not reflective of contemporary reality.
Because of time zones, I found myself playing Call of Duty's Nazi Zombies with German players on Xbox. I asked them on both occasions whether it was creepy fighting Nazi villains.
They were perfectly OK with it, because they were German, not Nazi. One of them likened it to me fighting KKK villains.
This movie has one of the most nuanced and humanizing (rather than demonizing) portrayals of German Soldiers I've ever seen.
1) The old German officer who gets beaten to death, he's obviously anti-sematic and racist ("YOU JEW DOGS!"), but at the same time has noble qualities, ("What did you get those medals for? Killing Jews?", "For bravery").
2) The German Soldiers celebrating the birth of a son, at the bar, they were treated as just buddies out for a drink, and not just an establishing shot, but also series of quick scenes that highlight the camaraderie and relationships between those bit characters.
On the flip side, we see the Nazi Leaders (Hitler and Goebbels) as almost outlandishly, one-dimensionally cartoonish characters. Even their colors are brash, not realistic, not subtle and almost comic.
Here being "one-dimensional" is not bad writing, but intentional, and worked very well to contrast the common German soldier with the Nazi Leadership.
Tarantino was saying "these Nazi Leaders were pieces of *beep* their actions are so horrendous that they deserve no sympathy and they deserve to be shot and burned alive for their crimes"
But Tarantino is also saying that "German soldiers are human beings, good and bad."
Who cares how Germans feel about how they are vilified in war films? Being history's biggest losers and then getting rebuilt by the generosity of America was the best thing that ever happened to them. They should watch these movies that vilify their grandparents and write us a thank you note.
share[deleted]
Are Stalin and Russia one of history's greatest losers? Did Russia get destroyed and then rebuilt by the US and its allies? I don't see how what you are saying is relevant to anything I posted.
shareRebuilt by the US for the sole purpose of preventing the Soviets from expanding through Europe,and now because of your so called "generosity", you ignorant hillbilly idiot.
Greetings from Germany
Why would our intentions matter? We still did it. You'll never show any gratitude because it's impossible to admit that getting your ass completely handed to you with an extra side of "loser" sauce was the best thing that ever happened to your country. I mean really, how does that feel? Think of what it must do to a nation's psyche to know that the single greatest thing that ever happened to that nation was its resounding defeat.
If Germany had won the war how would they have treated the US?
Yes they should be happy to see their grandparents mocked and vilified, but the reality is that in 50 years we will be mocking and vilifying the current generation of Germans who are intoxicated with cultural-marxism, white-guilt and islamofascism.
Germans (and many other continental europeans) seem to have some kind of genetic disposition for authoritarianism/socialism, which is totally alien to British/American culture.
They talk about the "eternal anglo" on 4chan alot, but geez, seeing one up close is bizzare. (of english ancestry btw)
share