“Basterds,” misspelled the way Brad Pitt’s moonshining Lt. Aldo Raine character carved it into his rifle, takes place in German-occupied France from 1941 to 1944.  Tarantino makes a point of specifying “Nazi-occupied France,” justifying to the film watcher the extreme measures needed to deal with this particular type of human evil.  That National Socialist German Workers’ Party membership never numbered more than about 20 percent of the adult German population is beside the point; the Nazi Party in the guise of Hitler (played by Martin Wuttke) controlled the Wehrmacht from the top.  

“Basterds” follows three characters.  ”Chapter 1″ introduces Shosanna Dreyfus (Mélanie Laurent) a young Frenchwoman whose dairy farmer family is wiped out in 1941 by the Germans and Col. Hans Landa (Christoph Waltz), who directs the killing.  Landa is a member of the Sicherheitsdienst (SD), the intelligence service of the SS and the Nazi Party, who considers himself a detective asked by his government to find every last Jewish person in France.  In “Chapter 2″ we meet U.S. Army Lt. Aldo Raine. Raine’s crossed arrows insignia on his collar identifies him as a member of the First Special Service Force, a U.S.-Canadian commando force called the Devil’s Brigade.  Lt. Raine leads a small band of soldiers, all of whom happen to be Jewish, on a mission of retribution, mayhem and terror behind enemy lines, the goal: take 100 “Nazi scalps” each. 

While “Basterds” is pure fiction, it does trace historical actions depicted in “Bodyguard of Lies” by Anthony Cave Brown.  “Bodyguard” details the deadly cloak-and-dagger action surrounding the effort to return Allied forces to the Continent on D-Day.  The scene with Mike Myers’ as British spymaster General Ed Fenech and Rod Taylor as Churchill suggests Major General Sir Stewart Menzies, Britain’s WWII head of the Secret Intelligence Service, as the basis for Myers’ character.  “Bodyguard’s” riveting accounts, such as the German capture and interrogation of British agent Princess Noor Inayat Khan (she was killed in Dachau, her last words being “liberty”), echo parts of “Basterds” – reminding one that “Basterds” may not be real, but it’s true – which brings up an inconvenient truth for some enthusiasts of Mr. Tarantino’s latest work. 

The theme of “Basterds” is revenge.  But revenge in this case takes place in occupied France in 1944.  In this context, Lt. Raine and his encouragement of scalping and other torture methods, violate the Hague Conventions (the forerunner to the Geneva Conventions) to which both the U.S. and Germany agreed.  The Hague’s Article 23 specifically prohibited the “treacherous” killing of an enemy, or harming enemies who had surrendered, or “declar(ing) that no quarter will be given.”  Of course, Raine’s men, usually operating sans uniform, were in violation of The Hague’s Chapter I, The Qualifications of Belligerents, Article 1, reading in part, that proper belligerents must, “have a fixed distinctive emblem recognizable at a distance” and “conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.”  Executing prisoners is, unfortunately, an unspoken reality of swift-moving commando forces operating behind enemy lines.  Beating enemy prisoners of war to death with a baseball bat while not wearing a uniform is an even more obvious violation of the law of war.  Under rules then in effect, if Raines’ men were captured while operating outside of these rules, they could be treated very harshly – even summarily executed. 

In 1949, the Geneva Conventions updated the Hague Conventions. The Third Geneva Convention, Part I, Article 4, parallels The Hague’s Article 23 in specifying the attributes of a legitimate prisoner of war who is deserving of protection by his captor.  It is this part of the law of war that the Bush Administration cited when justifying their treatment of men captured as part of the Global War on Terror (now called “overseas contingency operations”), i.e. al-Qaeda didn’t fight with “a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance” or carry “arms openly” or conduct “their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war” therefore they were “unlawful combatants.” 

It is interesting indeed to see those who applaud Tarantino’s latest, admittedly excellent work, revel in the unbridled revenge against Nazis who get what’s coming to them.  Many of whom, without batting an eye, view al-Qaeda killers as deserving of respect, protection, and the benefit of civilian law.  Since all that separates al-Qaeda from the Nazis is the means – industrial power, modern education, and an organized national base – one wonders why a certain amount of cognitive dissonance wouldn’t kick in after a liberal enjoyed screening “Basterds.” 

To the point, what would a liberal think of the scene where Lt. Raine interrogates a captured German sergeant, demanding the location of a German outpost and its supporting artillery?  As the German NCO refuses to talk, Raine orders one of his men to kill the prisoner with a baseball bat.  When the two remaining German prisoners see this, one runs in horror and is shot down, while the other is brought over and threatened with the same deadly treatment.  He talks, saving the lives of the American commandos.  For the prisoner’s troubles, Raines carves a swastika into his forehead.  By comparison, the waterboarding of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed during interrogation seems rather pedestrian. 

Were Lt. Aldo Raine unleashed in Waziristan today, he and his men (all from New York City to provide the needed element of justifiable revenge) would no doubt relish taking al-Qaeda and Taliban scalps.  Alas, were Tarantino to make this flick, it would end prematurely just as Osama bin Laden was about to be relieved of his wavy locks by Raine’s massive knife.  The unsatisfying closing sequence would have a shocked Raine arrested by FBI agents after the Basterds’ cover was blown by the New York Times.  The credits would roll on Raine’s trial by Attorney General Holder’s Department of Justice with bin Laden in protective custody as a witness to Raine’s heinous war crimes. 

I don’t see Tarantino making that film – it might not be real, but it’s too true for Hollywood.

It’s 1944 in Nazi-occupied France. Joseph Goebbels’ (Sylvester Groth) latest film triumph starring Germany’s latest hero, Fredrick Zoller (Daniel Brühl), is set to premiere for the top brass of the Third Reich – including the big cheese himself, Adolf Hitler – and their guests. Funnily enough, the premiere is to be held in a cinema owned by Shoshanna Dreyfus (Mélanie Laurent), a Jewish refugee with her own obvious reasons for hating the Nazis. Naturally, she plans her revenge for the fateful night.

Meanwhile the Basterds, a crack group of Jewish-American soldiers under the leadership of Lt. Aldo Raine (Brad Pitt), is undercover in France and “in the business of killing Nazis, and business is booming.” Those Nazis who manage to escape death are given meaningful souvenirs of their time with the Basterds. The paths of these two groups cross in a way that only Tarantino, master of gory coincidence, could imagine.

A good ol’ boy and Jews brutally mowing down Nazis. What’s not to like? It’s probably one of the few times you’ll see a redneck positively portrayed in Hollywood.

Don’t be fooled by the trailers that feature Pitt prominently. The film is an ensemble effort, with all of the key players turning in fine performances. Probably one of the best performances is by Christoph Waltz as the cold, evil, calculating Col. Hans Landa, whose unofficial nickname is the “Jew Hunter.” A true chameleon, he’s the master of charm one moment and a murderous bastard the next. No one – and I mean no one – can trust him. (I’ll never view an innocent glass of milk in the same way again.)

This is not your average World War II film. The heroes aren’t conventional “good guys,” but flawed human beings who don’t always come out on top. There are a number of “knots in the stomach” moments as you wait to see if someone will be exposed, and long conversations and monologues serve to heighten the tension. The sometimes choppy cinematography, ridiculously long close-ups, cheesy music and vigilante-style justice all contribute to the theme of a spaghetti Western set during World War II. It’s not all serious, however – there are a few laughs. There are also a few helpful voice-overs that give crucial background information, even though they are somewhat odd.

If you hate Quentin Tarantino’s films, you’ll probably hate this one. By the same token, if you love his films, this one’s for you. I remember being horrified by “Pulp Fiction,” but either I’ve become more jaded over time or the “violent with a purpose” theme works for me – or both. Think about it: Nazis getting a taste of their own vile medicine. It’s quite a satisfying scenario. And the unabashed pro-American stance is refreshing as well.

Just this week, the New York Times ran an article about the fact that A-list stars are failing to deliver big returns on their movies. But these days, Americans expect a lot for their entertainment dollar. It doesn’t matter how big the star is; if the movie’s crap, it’s going to bomb. No matter how big the name, it can’t save a rotten film. And with regard to “Basterds,” I found the premise intriguing enough to overcome my dislike of Brad Pitt and plunk down my $10.50. Oh, and keep an eye out for an almost-unrecognizable Mike Myers.

As to be expected in a Tarantino film, there is plenty of violence and gore, but not the slick kind that you’re used to seeing in the usual blockbuster. It’s raw and it’s very realistic – the woman next to me gasped out loud a number of times. If you have a weak stomach, think twice before going. And really, kids should not see this one. In fact, they were actually checking ID at the theater – which, by the way, was packed full.