Welcome to week #10 (review #9) of GBU. Last week I was absent because I was down and out with the sickness, and our man Chase was so kind to let me take the week off, but the show must go on!

To commemorate the release of Quentin Tarantino’s seventh movie, INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS, I was going to do a little retrospective on his past film posters (thanks to Mr. James Wallace’s excellent suggestion). This was BEFORE I actually saw BASTERDS, of course (and having seen all of the previous films).

Well, I saw it (like everyone else in America) this past weekend, and needless to say, it affected my original thoughts on the previous film posters, and the posters for BASTERDS itself. But I don’t write movie reviews (I leave that to the professionals), I simply “discuss” my thoughts on poster designs, and how they relate to the films they’re conceived to represent. That’s a key thought here, “representation.”

Looking back at the posters of Tarantino’s past works, I was reminded how delicious a lot of those posters were, and how they were such bold and memorable pieces for equally bold and memorable (if not revolutionary) films. I was really excited for BASTERDS (being a big Tarantino fan myself), and I was really excited to talk about these posters leading up to the release. Yet after seeing it, I’ve been forced to sort of retool the makings of my original “discussion” about the films of old. I have more perspective now.

So let’s talk about two of my favorite QT posters for two of my favorite QT films: RESERVOIR DOGS and PULP FICTION.

“Are you gonna bark all day little doggy, or are you gonna bite?”

To open with that line is cliché perhaps, yes, but back then, it wasn’t. Then, it was new. It was ballsy, and it was fresh. (Just like how it’s mentioned in the extras on my 15th Anniversary Edition of the film’s DVD, you look at that movie now, and one is inclined to say it’s full of indie-cult movie clichés, when in fact, they weren’t at the time, but so many have imitated the greatness that was/is, making such lines and situations, story-telling techniques, and camera angles trite now. Interesting.) The poster (one of a few released) that I had hanging in my room when I was a younger lad, represented perfectly the coolness, as well as the rawness of this unconventional film. I had the unique pleasure to see DOGS first, before I ever saw PULP FICTION (which was contrary to most people at the time, unless you were a hardcore film geek, and at the time, I was not, I was just lucky I suppose), so after I devoured DOGS and found a new appreciation for visual story-telling in the form of motion pictures, I quickly chowed-down on PULP FICTION, and the rest was history. The two most prized posters that hung on my bedroom walls were the above version of DOGS, and the common poster of PULP here:

They were inspiring to me, and stood as bold displays to remind me of the films they represented, testaments to what good, creative modern filmmaking SHOULD be (for the day) (and I thought Uma was smokin’ hot, so, that was a plus - still do, actually). It also helped that these two posters were GREAT looking (not just for Uma’s smoldering gaze). The simple, uncomplicated boldness of my DOGS poster, a personification of the stone-cold coolness that the characters were to me, yet still with a rough coating of texture. These guys, this band of thieves, scoundrels, killers, heroes, were anything but simple, yet, what the poster said to me was that the story itself, was so straightforward and beautiful, almost poetic, and still raw, all at the same time. The cluster of characters all emerging from the same source, graphically portrayed as some kind of overlay or imprint on something utilitarian like the drab cardboard whose corrugation can be subtly seen, adding the slightest bit of texture. This isn’t a perfect group of fellows, there’s something more underneath. The bold type treatment for the title, no-nonsense sans-serif type, almost like letter-press characters roughly arranged in a two-line stack, adds to the notion of simplicity and irregular texture combined (which for such a combination is really difficult to achieve harmony). One could argue that more blood and rage and “cool” would have made for a better representation of the movie, but, that’s just the spice on the entrée, not the juicy steak at its heart. It’s only when you cut into the steak, the blood flows.

PULP FICTION was like dessert. Oh-so sweet in its bite-sized morsels of narrative, with a huge helping of “cool” whip on every portion, it wasn’t all just sugar and fluff, but damn did it taste amazing. There was still the same amazing story-telling, rich, layered characters (even if we didn’t know just how many layers), and unique nuances that at the time only Tarantino could serve. So how does one package such a sadistically saccharine film made up of so many flavors into one bold image to convey all the layers of richness? Enter our girl Uma and a few little touches of garnish. I think this poster actually helped the wider audience that this film was aimed at to “understand” what they were about to get into. The broad movie-going audience at the time didn’t really know what it was meant by “pulp” fiction. So, they were shown by the poster. Oh! I get it! Cheap, trashy novels you could buy for a dime, and in fact, that gal is reading one, look! And if that gal is in it, well, let’s get trashy! It worked, and two-fold. It appealed to those who wanted to see a sexy girl do some bad things, a fresh new face in Hollywood to adore. Check. For the rest, oh look, a NEW film by that crazy new director, wow, this ought to be good if it’s anything like RESERVOIR DOGS! Look at that gun! Look at those dog-eared corners! Look at that cast list! This is a MUST see. It worked.

So what happened with BASTERDS?

I don’t know.

What I THINK is that the folks at Miramax were banking on the die-hard QT fans to see it regardless (true that). The folks they were worried about were those who might not be so inclined to see Tarantino’s work (for whatever reason). How do you do that? “BRAD PITT IS A BASTERD” - America loves Mr. Pitt. End of story.

When I spoke about the BASTERD character posters weeks before, I recall saying that I hoped that there would be more to come, that these posters, hopefully, were just teases, catered to the “Joe the Movie-Goer” audience. Well, that was it. Did they represent the film, as a whole, for all it’s nuances, et cetera, as well as say, those first two posters that hung so proudly on one wall of mine or another for years? I say no, not at all.

At the risk of going beyond my station here as a DESIGN critic, and not a film critic, I’m going to say just this: I’d still hang one of (if not both) of those posters above in my home (if we had the space, there’s a lot on our walls already), but would I hang a BASTERDS poster on my wall, for the same reasons that I had the other two on my walls before? No.

(I’m still going to purchase BASTERDS in Blu-Ray as soon as it’s released though...)

I’m looking forward to talking about more new posters next week, until then, all you happy basterds take care of yourselves.