Wednesday, 18 March 2015

Comparison between Inglorious Basterds and Miracle at St. anna

Throughout this piece I will be writing a comparison. Inglorious Basterds is the first film i will be comparing. It is a 2008 War film written and directed by Quentin Tarantino  starring Brad Pitt, Christoph Waltz, Melanie Laurent, Michael Fassbender, Eli Roth (Co-Director) and Diane Kruger. The film I will compare it too is Miracle at St. Anna which is a 2008 war film written and directed by Spike Lee, starring Derek Luke, Laz Alonso, Omar Benson Miller, Michael Ealy, Valentina cervi and Pierfrancesco Favino.


The first comparison is between the genres; both films are in the war genre and both are set following the events in WWII. However Inglorious Basterds is set in France during the war and follows a group of U.S Jewish Soldiers that plan to assassinate Nazi Leaders, it also follows a Jewish Cinema owner who had a past encounter with one of the leaders and plans to also assassinate the leaders. Where as Miracle at St. Anna is set primarily in Italy during the war and follows a group of four Buffalo Soldiers of the 92nd Infantry division who seek refuge in a town and bond with some of the town locals.


Both films are set around the same time yet get across different two very different points of view, the Jewish pov and the Black soldiers pov. The films are similar in that in both films the Nazi's are the obstacles that stop them from from reaching their goals and both films relate because they show the issues either religion or race had during the war. On the other hand Inglorious Basterds showed the issues between both religion and race because the lady who owned the cinema hired a black man and he was treated with no respect by any of the Nazi's. Miracle at St. Anna also produces war in a different sense. It shows the war between the Buffalo Soldiers and the American Army Generals.

Both films feature soldiers as their protagonists and they are all shown to be close, their relationships tend to seem more familial than friendly, like they have been together a long time and although they are at war and should be trying to protect one another in both films they seem more like they are protecting family. I think this familial relationship especially stands out in Miracle at St. Anna, and is portrayed even further when they find the young boy. In Miracle at St. Anna they all seem to work together and all have a say in what they will do where as in Inglorious Basterds Lt. Aldo Raine is the leader.


Inglorious Basterds predominantly follows a linear narrative, however their is a time skip from 1941 to 1944. Miracle at St. Anna on the other hand follows a non linear narrative because it is usually set during the war which in context of the film is the past and is shown in flashbacks. Miracle at St. Anna  could follow a circular narrative because Hector Negron who is introduced to us and questioned at the beginning is also the man that is shown at the end. A particular object that is found during the start of the film is also shown to us again at the end.

I feel that in both films the characters are developed however they are developed more in Inglorious Basterds, especially Shosanna who owns the cinema. I feel she was the most developed because we learnt about her back story which as the very first sequence of the film. However for me the characters in Miracle at St. Anna were easier to connect to because their plan was not to deliberately harm anyone but because of the situation they were in they had too. Sam Train was the easiest character to connect to because Lee made his character caring and at times relate able. Both directors produced the relationships between the characters really well.


In my opinion I preferred Inglorious Basterds because the narrative was easier to follow and the film was more exciting but  narrative in Miracle at St. Anna was stronger. However I think both films successfully showed the War genre in very different ways and were able to represent war in it's true self because neither tried to make it seem calmer or not as bad than it was.

2 comments:

  1. Well Done Lauren, you highlight the key differences and similarities between the two films with ease. Going forward you will need to draw references that contextualise both films in respect of the socio-political context, the Directors against their body of work and the context of how each film was produced.

    What would you add now that you have studied both directors?

    ReplyDelete
  2. good points in this such as the solider pov in both films as well as the mention of liner naratives good piece but at the same time is there enough to revise off?

    ReplyDelete