Tom (4 out of 10 ) I, for one, am tired of Tarantino's writing, which was once so fresh. Why does the Nazi Colonel deliver a long monologue that is so similar to ones we have heard in Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, Jackie Brown, and Kill Bill? The reason is that Tarantino, despite his knack for turning trivial details into pop-culture phenomena, is too limited in his ability to create and relate to new characters. All of his protagonists over the years have sounded the same; they speak like like he speaks. Again, I am tired of it, and I had high hopes for this picture. Also, I know this is an early script, and I know grammar and spelling are not the most important aspects of such a medium, but I am shocked by how poorly this screenplay is written. "Could of" instead of "could have", "our" instead of "are". I was really disappointed by the grammatical errors and the all-too-familiar cool, menacing monologues. Still, I hope the picture gets made and I hope I will enjoy it.
Nick A. (7 out of 10 ) Who wrote, or better RE-write this? Lord almighty, I haven't seen more mistakes in written language since my daughter's 2nd grade Elementary writing tests. And I'm "second language". Poor us, 'baby writers', living in doubts and some in fear of Hollywood Readers. Well, I guess, once you have name and you know you'll be directing your script you can put it on the title page, screw english, screw german... HERR, yes with double 'r', means Mister in german, not HEER, holy smoke (And I'm not of German descent)... 'rumors are more reveling, not reveAling? DreyfussIs instead of Dreyfusses. Great Script, always pulling idea of hiding Jewish people during Holocaust, I like it a lot. AND in the future, if someone will point out some imperfections in my scripts I can always direct him to this writing.
Morten Sejer Hansen (8 out of 10 ) Entertaining script. Kinda sloppy spelling and grammar though. I do look forward to the movie, which does seem very Tarantinoesque with 2 storylines intertwining each other. It's also kinda refreshing with a fairytale/adventure set in a historical setting (WW2). Tarantino seems to follow a little bit in the footsteps of his previous Grindhouse films - the characters are kinda one dimensional and not to bee taken too seriously - It is a comedy after all. The light-hearted fairytale approach to this film also allows for Tarantino to created a good amount of suspense and a few laughs and surprises as well - as historical events are turned upside down and new ones created. Although there is a few of very recognizable Tarantino dialogues in Inglorious Basterds, there aren't as many as in many of his previous films. Probably for the better considering the WW2 setting kinda limits too cocky a dialogue. The movie at some points does also seem to be an ode to some of the german filmmakers of the time, like Leni Riefenstahl, but i'm not sure. It also at some points seems to be the opposite - The victory of Hollywood over German cinema. Hmmm.....
Anyway all in all it looks promising - There's a couple of very gory scenes.Some action. A few good laughs. A good amount of suspense. A little love for the ladies. And a couple of pleasant surprises. I'm definitely going to watch it.
ALFONSO (9 out of 10 ) It's a pity that the history didn't go as the movie shows. I didn't expect Tarantino to write such a good script about the Second World War. I enjoyed it maybe more than other Tarantino scripts. I love how in this case he creates great situations with incredible dialogues in which there's no word without a concrete purpose. I like how in this case all those situations are well connected.
Just reading the first scene you can have an idea about the quality of the rest of the dialogues and of the story.
Hunter (8 out of 10 ) Great read. For once it doesn't feel like Tarantino is ripping off himself (Pulp Fiction) or kung-fu movies (Kill Bill, nearly everything he produces). I suspect the claims of this being a spaghetti western are only partly true. If anything, this is an inversion of the classic western, with the 'injuns' played by the good guys -the Basterds, and the cowboys played by the nasty nazis.
A recommended read.
Anonymous (10 out of 10 ) I'm usually not a big fan of Tarantino movies and this was the first time that I ever read one of his scripts. But I must say that reading this was simply awesome. The style and manner in which he writes is indeed astonishing. Can't wait to see the whole movie. Thanks IMSDb.
P. Richardson (7 out of 10 ) The formatting of this script aggravates me at times. Especially when you want to print out as a PDF and all the mishaps keep on appearing. The same problem with True Romance. And does anyone know if that Natural Born killers script is really written by him? Now to the Script.. haven't read it, so I don't know, but the opening scene made me think big time of the opening to The Good the Bad and the Ugly where the Angel Eyes comes to the house and kills the entire family in the opening scene. Still great though the tension shifts so well. Wonder how it will play on the big screen.
Aaron (10 out of 10 ) Wonderful, just wonderful. Tarantino did an amazing job, great story, great ending, graphic, awesome. Wonder how this will go with the movie crowd though because it doesn't have a lot of action, except for the ending and the one bar scene.
Douglas (8 out of 10 ) One, I must admit I love the way he puts "himself" into his scripts and how he explains situations in ways only he can. But, oh yeah I'm using a but, this script was not his best work. I knew I was not going to be reading the next Pulp Fiction or any of that fantastic dialogue from Jackie Brown but I was expecting more than this. The characters are amazing, the usual bad asses from any Quentin Tarantino movie, but the setting and the way the characters interacted were odd to me. I just don't think he knew how to put his spin on the WW genre and it may have been better for him to stick to his roots. But he is a madman with a camera and an artist with a pen so I give it a 8 out of 10 and I say keep writing!
Henry (10 out of 10 ) If Sergio Leone and Sam Peckinpah had joined forces in the '70s to make a World War II film, Quentin Tarantino's script for "Inglourious Basterds" is easily what could've been the script for the masterpiece that never was. Now, instead, we've got a new masterpiece, a masterpiece by the master of film making today. The best scene by far has got to be the seen in La Louisianne, the small underground bar outside of Paris. Tarantino's style of witty dialogue leading up to an extremely violent moment is mastered in this scene as a British lieutenant teams up with two of the Basterds to meet up with a German actress (who is working for the allies) in the French bar. But everything goes wrong when a group of Nazis show up at the bar to party and celebrate one of the privates who had just had a child. Amongst the group is a major who figures out that the British lieutenant isn't German at all. The realization leads into and incredibly intense and incredibly violent Sam Peckinpah-style gunfight between the Basterds and the Nazis. Hopefully, this scene will be pure cinema on screen.
BobTheSailor (6 out of 10 ) I love R-Dogs, Pulp fiction, NBK and true romance but everything else has been mediocre to complete shit (no offense). This looks overdone, I mean the jew bear, the jew hunter, that is so dumb but he thinks it's original or something. The speech is excellent but the scalping thing never ever happened or wasn't even recorded happening once, that was just a little extra violence to throw in. I hope he edits it severely. Nevertheless, good plot and Aldo Raine is an interesting character. I hope this film turns out good, because it would be a shame.
A For Awesome (10 out of 10 ) Terrific script. Pure entertainment. I'll probably be shot for this but I reckon it'll be better than The Dirty Dozen...
Definite Spaghetti Western:
The Good - Shossana
The Bad - Col.Hans Landa
The Ugly - Lt. Aldo Raine
P.S...for the gods sakes - stop getting your knickers in a twist over the spelling booboos, its still readable aint it?...besides its not like the mistakes are gonna be seen in the movie....except the title.
UnknownFilmBuff (9 out of 10 ) This is an excellent script. Period...? Well, no... Everything Tarantino writes is excellent (Fan boy ALERT!!), except Pulp Fiction was not excellence, it was Art. Inglourious Basterds has great style and EXCELLENT dialogue but it's main flaw is the film is never very involving. Subtitles, Title-cards kinda take you out of the read and distract you from the main attraction to any film: the STORY. But what do I know? With Tarantino it always has been style over substance (Kill Bill, example) and Kill Bill was genius to a certain extent. But what would you pick, that or 'Dogs'..?
Batman (10 out of 10 ) I don't see what everyone's problem is with this. The only issue I have is the errors in uploading it to the site. Like in the end of the bar scene it's like "And then the one guy stands up and e ou achine un sho ev yo and the smoke clears and the fight is over." That was kind of a cockblock.
Jake (10 out of 10 ) What a great script! Tarantino is my favorite director and writer. And this is definitely almost as good as script to "Pulp Fiction". When I heard about the plot for the first time, I was doubting could the script be good. But, there is something great about it. We have all the parts of Tarantino's movie - violence, dialogues... and I was doubting that there would be any foot-fetish scene in it, but I was wrong. I can't wait to see it all in cinema on August 21st - the violence, the talks and Diane Kruger's feet.
Ron (2 out of 10 ) This screenplay is exhausting to read. I know Tarantino is one of Hollywood's "wonder boys" but since the man obviously can't write, he should at least hire someone to correct his spelling and grammar. I've seen better written stories come out of the second grade. He doesn't know when to use: there, their and they're ... I don't think he used any of them correctly even once. And the dialogue ... it never ends. Page after page after page. It's obvious he figures he'll be directing this himself because there isn't a lot of action in the screenplay, just endless talking heads.
Cali-4-nia (7 out of 10 ) I found this script OK, but definitely not his best work. I thought Inglorious Basterds was quite recycled. The opening scene is a german version of Pulp Fiction's Ezekiel scene, the french bar shoot-out, could have come from any number of his films, (R-Dogs, True Romance) and his "revenge" theme carries out in every film he's ever made. Although I do like to see him stretching his imagination a little more, and trying to come up with something original. I can see the disadvantage being a period piece, but over all it was done moderately well. I will see this film, and probably enjoy it for what it is, a Tarantino film.
Film Critic (10 out of 10 ) Excellent work! This is by far Tarantino's best work since Pulp Fiction. The grammar is irrelevant because the ideas, thoughts, and interactions are in such perfect harmony as they gravitate towards action. The pacing of the script is marvelous, and leads the audiences time and time again to anticipate what never happens, or happens. This is also different from anything Tarantino has ever done, and comes off completely original.
Katie (9 out of 10 ) I for one loved the writing. The screenplay, unlike some I've perused, was very easy to follow and flowed well. It felt like I was reading a novel. For instance when the Jews are hiding under the floorboards in the opening sequence, I was holding my breath and even freaked out when the Farmer gave up their hiding place. The only thing I was disappointed about was the fact that a few of the best moments from the script weren't actually included in the movie. Like when Shoshana pees herself at the cafe table or when "the Bear Jew" is searching for his weapon of choice back in New York. It was also refreshing to see a script where for once someone wrote naturally and wasn't relying on spell check... It's more raw and real that way, plus it gives me some good laughs to know I have slightly better English skills than an amazing director I look up to.
tapthecacti (7 out of 10 ) Did anyone else feel as though one of the primary characters (Hans Landa) changed motivation for seemingly no reason? How can one go from being a feared "jew hunter" appreciating the nicknames leveled by enemies to a character who resents the stigma such names place on the individual? Such an epic villain to have simply surrender!
JJayJ (7 out of 10 ) I first read the script, then saw the movie. The audience laughed a lot, surprising me since the tone of much of the written script was dark suspense. Thankfully, Tarantino's previous reliance on gore to carry a movie has been (somewhat) replaced with both suspense (and more humor). Tapthecati is right. Landa's transformation fell short of the mark. The character is inconsistent. Sure...he lets Shoshanna escape in the beginning creating sympathy, but then he brutally strangles Bridget just before the LET'S MAKE A DEAL scene. True to a cynic's behavior/character perhaps, but one wonders why he wouldn't just bring Bridget along as extra insurance to broker his DEAL. Why kill her if he was planning an escape? Like a skip in a record, I felt I missed something there. It may fit into the rising tension of the scene sequence, but less so in the plot. Leaving the theater, Landa didn't quite add up. Was it greed that blinds him? Or did he become his less gifted twin? I felt he deserved his end because he had become comical, not because he was evil. This clever, cold-blooded killer ends up a clumsy, gullible, innocent.
PETER (10 out of 10 ) Reading this script was like watching a film while I was reading, I saw pictures in my mind. There are errors "yes" but maybe Tarantino had the reason for those errors on the dialogue but the most important thing is he managed to make us see his film before seeing it on screen. Big ups to you.
goodguysVSbadguys (9 out of 10 ) To tapthecacti, I think the fact that he switched sides so easily made him even more "vilified". This was a man so sadistic that it transcended all levels of morality and loyalty. If he was badass enough to screw Hitler over, I give him the crown.
Kevin (10 out of 10 ) Reading the script was interesting, because had I not seen the movie already, I don't think I would have picked up on a lot of the humorous situations. It makes me wonder if they were planned by Tarantino or improvised on set (I'm guessing a little of both). Though one thing that's clear from the first scene is that his dialogue is definitely the stuff of genius. It was a blast to read, just like it was a blast to watch.
And go easy on the grammar stuff guys. Tarantino has dyslexia, and personally I think it's all the more impressive he can write so well and be so successful with that disability.
Brut (8 out of 10 ) Tarantino is a master story teller. Screw the typos. It's a page turner that every wannabe writer should study, and work to emulate.
Elizabeth (5 out of 10 ) The typos and spelling mistakes were totally distracting. It's probably a great story, but I'm on to the next script, one which hopefully employed a proofreader.
Michael (2 out of 10 ) I couldn't read more than 4-5 pages.. it's really bad. A pretentious take on a subject he knows or feels very little about. Shame.
Stephan (10 out of 10 ) You people really need to learn to appreciate something for what it is, rather than picking it apart piece by piece in order to have a reason to express your worthless and critical opinion online.
moviebugface (8 out of 10 ) Format sucked, but it aint Tarantino's fault. very good dialogue. Seen the movie and glad to see that some of the stuff in the script wasn't in the movie. His work is always a good read.
Nick A. (7 out of 10 ) So I've seen the movie. Way too late after my unfinished first comment and on a cable television. The idea, the premise. Oh my. The history of the Kill Bill saga. End of the war the Tarantino way. I like that. The best part of it is Christoph Waltz as Col. Landa, I mean he HAS TO get an Oscar for this. My friend told me:". it's like there's no Pitt, no others, only him". I'll keep my previous rate. For the most original approach ever to kill Adolf. And for the Inglorious Writing. Thank you Mr. Tarantino.
Sam (10 out of 10 ) People need to stop acting like Quentin was trying to make a typical World War II movie. If you've seen any of his other films, you can obviously tell he puts his own spin on things. Beautiful script, beautiful movie and by far one of the best directors of our generation.
Shay (10 out of 10 ) For Tom, the boy who says he is tired of Tarantino's writing, I challenge you to write a script that is any better. The Jew Hunter's speech in the beginning is fantastic, and the movie is over all great. It is very clever and entirely of its own, aside from the original version of this movie, there is none like it.
Patrick (6 out of 10 ) This isn't a terrible film, but it could have been a LOT better. Especially considering the subject matter for crying out loud. I mean, c'mon. Jews Hunting Nazis! This is the kind of thing Quentin was born to make. Most of the film's problems lie in too much dialogue. I understand dialogue is one of Quentin's trademarks but in a story like this I wanted more action and less talking. Less is more. I know it sounds like I'm trashing this but I will say that I'm recommending it because the opening scene, a random shoot out in the middle, and the finale are amazing. But really, that's it pretty much it.
kraja (5 out of 10 ) This is going to be tarantino's last movie. I wonder what he'll do with the rest of his life. As for the movie, it was slow. Too slow, too contrived. I am honestly tired of this shit. Like at the la louisiane(i don't give a shit about the spelling), the movie came to a stand still. It felt like a 6hr movie. This man better start directing scripts written by other people, or he's finished.
Steven (9 out of 10 ) First of all this isn't the script Tarantino wrote. I have a copy of it on my kindle. Secondly Tarantino is know for dialogue driven movies, This no different I suggest if you don't like his writing or his movies you find a Screenwrite or Director you do like. I happen to think the Col. Landa character is fantastically written. The whole movie is a masterpiece.
Jon (10 out of 10 ) Ok as far as the movie itself goes, I wasn't completely satisfied. They spent a little too much time on the chick who owned the movie theater and not enough on the Basterds themselves. HOWEVER, I found this to be quite a good film nonetheless, particularly due to the Tarantino style that I have come to love. But that's just the movie. The screenplay, however, is very creative. The way Quentin Tarantino is able to make you visualize the events as they happen, as well as the emotions and tensity of the situations is quite remarkable. He also does a great job creating his characters so that even the smallest role has a personality that you get to know in there scenes, even if they are short- lived at times. The movie is definitely worth a look, but this script is really gold when it comes to writing.
Logan (10 out of 10 ) When first saw this movie, I was blown away. This film is probably better than Pulp Fiction. For starters, it won and nominated Christoph Waltz so many awards along with many of the other actors and it almost won the best original screenplay of 2009. The reason why this movie is so great is because it does a good job of portraying what could have happened if the characters in the movie really did exist.
flubndub (6 out of 10 ) A disappointing movie. Not bad but not as good as I was expecting. Tarantino may be loosing it a bit. I tire of his' long dialogues and the fan boy attention he showers on his' leading ladies. In other words. Boring. The scenes with the bastards themselves were great. But the title should have been "The Inglorious Bastards present, a girl's revenge on the Nazi's who killed her' family and a Nazi Officer who talks too much. And a long bar scene that finally ends with everybody dead." I wanted better and didn't get it. Still a good movie that's entertaining in spots.
Jeff (10 out of 10 ) Is it possible that the scanning software is responsible for the errors and not Quinten? I have downloaded old books from google books and they are full of weird spelling and other typos. I really liked the movie, it seems that the casting is his real genius. I could just here Christoph Waltz or Brad Pitt in my head as I was reading.
Cameron (1 out of 10 ) The theater massacre at the end is freakin awesome, but I'm going to skip the rest of the movie, I mean come on, how are you going to call this a war film and leave out the good stuff? Tarantino's only good films are kill bill part 1, natural born killers, true romance, and from dusk until dawn.
stickler4grammar (1 out of 10 ) What a mess! Evidently, Tarantino can't even get someone to proofread his scripts. Misspelled words everywhere. Just a sloppy mess. Does he know the difference between your and you're or their and there? It sure doesn't look like it. He was too lazy to look up how to spell Berchtesgaden. Too lazy to do a lot of the work necessary for script writing. And what is with all the oddly placed typed characters thrown in where they don't belong? Every screenwriter should read this sloppy mess and pat themselves on the back for staying sober. How did this guy make it through English class in high school? The movie turned out great but there has to be another version of this script that was actually used by the actors. Oh, and by the way Genious Tarantino, when describing how the guy hand signaled he wanted three glasses, you should have written "thumb to pinkie," not "index to pinkie," (which makes no sense). This was a critical stage direction and you were too drunk to write it so it made sense to the actor. Tarantino didn't even use proper screenplay format. I guess that's what happens when you become famous. You start believing all the sycophants around you who tell you everything you do is fantastic.
constantinII (8 out of 10 ) @ Nick a, Tarantino makes the kind of movies you watch, watch again, discuss them with friends and watch them about half a million times after that. As for the Hans Landa's sudden change, I think it's totally credible. What Tarantino created was a character who paid no allegiance to anyone but himself. For example, against protocol he let's Shossana escape, and then by the time we get to the end (1944) this guy has seen the writing on the wall, Nazis are on the verge of defeat, he's not going to be caught on the losing side, so he decides to use the basterds to buy his freedom, outside of Bridget and the basterds, no one else knows he was a double agent, Bridget herself was an agent for the allies, and if she had lived, she'd have made statements contrary to Hans Landa being a double agent, so she had to be dispatched. And it makes total sense to me. It's consistent with the character.
Tuuli (8 out of 10 ) I absolutely love this film! But I don't love this script, since it's so full of grammar errors as the other users have pointed out. I'm going to search the web for alternative versions for it. And besides, I'd really love a version with the film dialogue, to say with the German, French and Italian parts. I don't know if one exists.
Cameron (1 out of 10 ) This is the worst war movie ever, the pacing is terrible and there's barely any action, the only good parts are the big theater shootout at the end and the flashback of Hugo Stiglitz kickin ass and getting busted out of jail.
SpecFxDude (1 out of 10 ) GARBAGE! What is wrong with you disciples of this retard? He's nothing more than a video clerk who got lucky by ripping off an Asian movie and producing a screenplay he sold to the world as his own creation. He's a media whore whose writing is tired and boring and he's got to be the MOST overrated no-talent hack in Hollywood history. I honestly have no clue what the public sees in his crap. He makes pop culture references in his movies and people act like he created the English language. And why the hell did he have to name this script Inglorious Basterds? There was already a WW2 movie called Inglorious Bastards, but I guess he thought it'd make him seem cool to change one letter and make it look like another "homage" to classic action cinema. Whatever. Please retire, QT, so we don't have to be subjected to your senseless crap anymore.
Ricci Jermaine (10 out of 10 ) I can't believe the petulance of the people on this site, how can you actually sit there and dare type those words tearing into Tarantino, you think you're so good, you write anything close to what he writes. Sure, he steals from other movies, and he does reuse material, but when he does he simply creates a movie experience better than the previous. Not his best movie, but still a solid 10.
Jake Riding (10 out of 10 ) While it is a magnificent film Tarantino I think went a bit overboard trying to impress us with his writing and in that some of the dialogue is quite gratuitous.
JC (8 out of 10 ) A good read! His characters sound too young & misled since youth as always. Their thinking capabilities sound limited. But if Mr. Tarantino's "own voice" wins him Awards, then good for him! Great entertainment to read, not as American-in-depth as Warhol. Django, Pulp, Jackie: quite good as screenplay literature.
Cameron (1 out of 10 ) They spent WAY too much time on the shoshanna story and not enough on the basterds themselves, if it had just focused on the basterds with glimpses of shoshanna's activity here and there, I would've liked it better.