Reviews

When most people think of a debate, they picture televised Presidential debates, which are glorified campaign ads tailored for the viewing audience. If that's your idea of a debate, you may be in for a shock if you watch "Resolved." The only thing that competitive high school and college debate have in common with a Presidential debate is that both involve speaking.

"Resolved" takes the viewer into the world of top-level high school debate, which is both fascinating and incoherent. Since a strategy called "the spread" came into vogue in the 1960s, debate has morphed into a rapid-fire contest to see who can make the most arguments and read the most pieces of evidence in a short time span. Competitive debate features the fastest speaking this side of a Federal Express commercial. Luckily for the viewer, many clips from the debates in "Resolved" come with subtitles.

"Resolved" follows two debate teams--one from a rich college prep school near Dallas and one from an inner-city school in Long Beach. Both do quite well on the national level, which is compelling in itself, but things become complicated when the team from Long Beach changes its strategy from the dry piling-on of evidence to arguments born of their personal experience. A resolution about the detaining of terrorism suspects becomes personal as they work their own issues with racism into their arguments.

As a former college debater, "Resolved" brought back many memories, but it also made me think. While debate is a fun and educational scholastic activity, it is also weighted toward the rich and privileged. Just which students, after all, have the easiest access to the voluminous files of evidence necessary to succeed at debate's highest level? What does this say, not only about debate, but about education, and, in general, about American culture?

Quentin Tarantino continues to assert his unique niche among filmmakers with "Inglourious Basterds."

What makes Tarantino's films work is that he's able to take elements from his favorite genres--some of which are not well respected in film circles--and turn them into something entirely his own. So it is with his WWII saga, "Inglourious Basterds." The tale of good ol' boy Brad Pitt and his all-Jewish Army unit whose sole goal is to "kill Nazis" draws obvious comparisons to films like "The Dirty Dozen," but Tarantino's inspiration comes more from spaghetti Westerns--from the music down to the camera angles (an early shot of Christoph Waltz with his gun pointed at the camera echoes Henry Fonda in "Once Upon a Time in the West").

The clever dialog that made "Pulp Fiction" and the "Kill Bill" saga so enjoyable is well on display here. So is the blood 'n gore for which Tarantino's name is almost a synonym (although the film is less bloody than "Kill Bill Volume 1"). At the same time, Tarantino shows the ability to thrill and chill without any blood. The banging of a baseball bat in the distance comes across as more chilling that an on-camera beating with the same bat. Contrary to what his critics may say, Tarantino is far more than a one-note goremeister.

As I write this, Waltz is the favorite to win the Best Supporting Actor Oscar, and I can see why. His "Jew Hunter" is not the stereotypical Nazi officer who shouts things like "Schweinhund!" He comes across as a gentleman as he subtly makes his evil intentions known, as in Chapter One of the tale. As the story develops, he becomes even more complex--the movie's most interesting character.

My only issue with this film is that the Basterds themselves could have been fleshed out more. I would have liked a bit more about their backgrounds and motives. Even though the film is named for the Basterds, the most developed characters are outside that group.

With "Inglourious Basterds," Tarantino has created yet another big, bad, bloody, and, yes, glorious comic book for grown-ups.