Rebel without a clue, part one

Some observers might observe that I am not a very good observer. Because most of the things that are happening to me, are happening to just me and only me. Perhaps because most of it is even happening inside my own head! So I might want to observe very carefully so I can pick apart what's in here and what's out there.

There's always the one observer who proclaims that everything you know is wrong. You're taught by the wrong people. Craving the wrong needs. Watching the wrong television. Eating the wrong food. Worshiping the wrong god. Handed the flashlight of inquiry but kept in the dark, as to not overstep any boundaries in order to keep your attention on what you need to attend.

One such is Albert, a friend of my nephew. Albert is something else and proud of it. He tries to cast a shadow of doubt on every aspect of life. Except for the ones he really likes. Speaking mostly in hyperbole he commits one of the worst sins: exaggeration. Contrast is turned to 150%. So when trying to discuss a black and white world with the man, you're either friend or foe. Apt words for someone ready to take up arms about what he perceives is true. He's strengthened in his convictions because he has quite a lot of allies who share his point of view. A body of men who've all agreed to be nonconformists.

He's a higher education drop-out. When asked about it, he'll state that the school system didn't really suit him anyway. To his credit though, he has tried a few different courses, from psychology to art. The first because of Albert's immense people-skills and the last because his boundless creative energies. Knowing Albert a bit, I'm sorry to say he might be lacking in both departments. He can help people and create art in the same capacity that everybody knows how to sing, or how everyone knows how to be a politician, or a soccer trainer. From the looks of it these are skills that don't require much if only you're born with the talent. But that can't be imagined. Plus there's training involved. His ambitions were well founded too, change the world for the better. Too bad then that his ambitions were quenched when he saw the volume of paper being handed to him on the very first academic day. The fact that changing the world takes a lot of work cooled him on that and he gave up on ambition all together. There had to be an easier way. Like flipping the switch that would make it all right. So he went in search for the switch. The one thing that will instantly reverse the wrongs into rights. A search for a holy grail that will end in the realization that there probably isn't one. I don't know what is the cause of this binary thinking. Perhaps it hails all the way back to the cave where problems were addressed as "food or no food", "crap or no crap", "sleep or no sleep", "woman or no woman" where the solution was to just take it, or in some cases drag it back to the cave by the hair. It sure took a lot of time before "to be or not to be" entered someone's mind and even depressingly longer before "god or no god". A sure sign that the binary brain needs a lot of education.

I was surprised to hear things went like this because any sane person knows it takes a lot of work to do anything in this world. And I'm not just talking about mending world hunger, even feeding yourself can be a daunting task sometimes. You might know what I'm talking about.
For example, whenever I want to make myself a sandwich I'm first faced with the fact that all plates, cutlery and cups have been standing in the sink for a couple of days, marinating in the remains of tea and coffee. The knives have a hardened crust of jam or chocolate spread and the plates have doubled in size with the crusted remains of past meals. I have to turn the hot water tap and wait for it to get warm. A time and energy investment that's hard to justify in the first place so since I have to wash up a few pieces I might as well wash all of them. After this form of ritual cleansing comes time to get a few loaves of bread. The bread is nowhere to be found. Except for the one inside the freezer, which is frozen solid to the inner left side. It's there just in case we ran out of bread and all bakers decided to go on strike because inflation had inflated the costs of production. The running out of bread happened the night before and the bread was bought only hours before that. But no matter, it has to go into the microwave to be defrosted. Upon opening said apparatus I realize it still contains some leftovers on yet another dirty plate. The food has long gone stale so it goes into the bin, which is located in the hall of the building. During the commute to the hall, the bread is melting to a puddle of dough and frost water because instead of inputting one minute of "melt some of the ice" I have put in "melt all solid matter". A common mistake because the defrosting function is only one notch removed from the "nuclear fusion" function. At this stage hunger is starting to take over from logic so I take the roughly loaf shaped item out of the radiation and reach for the butter - a cup of scrape-marks lined with crumbs and butter, achieving the worlds worst cocktail impression. Some fresh butter is obtained on the way back from the bin in the hallway where the crumb-cocktail finds it's final resting place next to the leftovers. When the phone doesn't start to ring when the sandwich is two centimeters away from your mouth, it's a piece of cake. But in the end, all I wished for was a sandwich. Wishful thinking simplifies things. Life never is.

Albert once read a book about wishful thinking. It was written by an American woman who has a degree from the prestigious university of www.degreesoftruth.com. But what's more, she once talked to the Dalai Lama and was infinitely blessed with a Buddhist physique and a revelation which lead to the book. Albert must have wished for a lot of money because he has been declining a lot of jobs these last few months.
His professional activities consist entirely of refusing work from the temping office. Mainly because the jobs are too mean. He was told by his parents and teachers as a child that he was special, unique, a gift of god. Through childhood and puberty he read stories about heroes and kings. Affirming this belief and so the need for a special destiny remains. No, he wants something important and meaningful. Apparently, he knows too much to be filling up cardboard boxes.
My critics are happy to point out that I never found myself predisposed to fill boxes as a profession. It's true. But I never pretended to know too much to do so in the first place. I only knew I wanted to do something else. So I set out to know too much. How do you know what to learn? By specializing in what you already know. How do you know what you already know? Recount your talents, and think about how they've expanded over time.

Albert knows too much because he's got the Internet. But that's a chapter I'll get to.

The Humanism of Mass Effect 2

 

Ne nos inducas in tentationem, sed libera nos a Malo

If there's one thing we can thank the bible for it's the way it has made literary archetypes and memes. At first glance Mass Effect seems to borrow quite a bit of them. Project Lazarus, a club called Afterlife, ascension... Could there be something more going on? In my previous posts I've spotted a very engaged humanist vision in the stories and characters of their games. So I kept my eyes peeled while playing Mass Effect 2. In this post I want to explore how far the bible analogy goes and where it breaks down. Are there any differences? Can it tell us something about our human condition today - which is for some, if not a lot of, people a big part of what defines art.

Mass Effect 2 doesn't seem to be as epic as its predecessor. It's more intimate. The game is much more focused on its characters, interaction and dialogue. The events less grand in scope. Shepard needs to build a team to take out the Collectors. Emphasis is laid on the team building. The taking out is done in, what is presumed, a suicide mission behind enemy lines. Because of this, you end up fighting primarily to save your team, saving the galaxy seems like a secondary objective.

I should say that this post will potentially be one big crackpot theory. As the rather pretentious title of this post might suggest. It's a continuation of my own series started with my Dragon Age post. In which I said that Bioware has a very strong humanist viewpoint. Christians might call it anti-christian. But besides the fact that any religion will feel picked on no matter what, there might something to be said for those feelings, given the biblical names and themes in the game. Also keep in mind that this is what I'm reading from the game and isn't said to be the outspoken opinion of the company.

Religion in Mass Effect is rather curious. Because no alien race in the Mass Effect Universe is religious. That is to say, truly religious in so far as the player would have to believe that there is a "true religion" within the fiction. When Ashley admits she and her family are very religious, Shepard would rather believe her dead father to be a zombie than believe he's watching from heaven. "Wherever that is" she adds, a logical comment to make when you're born in a space-faring civilization. Heaven was supposed to be a sky kingdom in the clouds, as evident in classical paintings, and space doesn't have quite the same kind of clouds nor anything we could naively call "the sky". As Shepard you can confess to Ashley that he is religious, just as she is. It is considered a Paragon choice. However, Bioware has made the Renegade Shepard canon. So they have made Shepard, de facto, an anti-religious Atheist (ruling out even Agnosticism).

The most outspoken religious race in ME are the Hannar. They are a Jellyfish-like race, soft spoken but a bit naive. And because of it, often the butt of jokes. And mostly referred to as "the Jellys".They revere "the inkindlers". A superior race who bestowed knowledge upon them. The inkindlers turn out the be the Protheans. They turn out to be an extinct alien race. Then there's the Asari. A spiritual race. They often speak of "the Goddess". Not an odd choice for a race of females. A further comment on our human beliefs where no deity could be female in a society dominated by men. The game is very positive about the Asari point of view. Yet the faith is dispelled as soon as the Novaria mission in the first Mass Effect. Where Benezia bemoans the lack of a "promised white light, they said there would be..." with her dying breath. It isn't said that the Goddess is an actual deity or a spiritual unconsciousness, but by Benezia's comment there is at least some deception going on. A portion of the Geth, a sapient machine race, worship the Reapers. Because they are supreme mechanical synthetic lifeforms. That they do not fit the picture of an ideal God needs no explanation. Or does it? They are powerful, eternal, or so they say, have worshipers, and promise ascension. Ascension is the term Harbinger, the main antagonist, uses in Mass Effect 2 during the collectors' harvest of human colonies. This because their actual physical biomass will be used to construct a "human reaper". A god in the image of man. Man made god. Or plainly put, a god made out of Human bodies. Bioware is painting quite a cynical picture of what a god is.

The central figure in the series is Shepard. Gathering disciples of all walks of life of many worlds. He's a born leader. His name is Shepard. It's pretty clear that the closest resemblance is Jesus. More so in Mass Effect 2, where he dies and is resurrected with project Lazarus. Lazarus, not Jesus. Indeed not, but imagine what game this would have been if the project had been called "Project Jesus". It would hit the player over the head with symbolism that isn't really necessary. It would change the tone of the game dramatically and would probably offend a portion of the lucrative American audience. And anyway, 'Lazarus' is also often used to denote a situation where one is presumed dead but ultimately isn't.

The meaning of the Illusive man becomes a bit more complicated. He's got godlike qualities, like the Reapers. He's seemingly all-knowing. Apparently lives forever. Doesn't give a sod about his health. Does whatever he deems necessary. Raises Shepard from the dead and like the god of the bit monotheistic faiths: cares about his own people (humans) first and foremost and at the expense of all other. A position that's bound to be problematic in a universe with a variety of sentient species.

Like all Bioware games, there's a lot to do about morals. As with religion. Both have a prominent place in everyday live. They seem linked even to the extent that it's generally, and wrongfully, believed that religion is where morals originated. I noticed that ethics in this story come from the characters themselves, not ever from some dogma or handbook. I could say these characters are a mouthpiece for the writers of the story, schooling the player in modern philosophy.

A prime example is Mordin, a Salarian scientist. It may be a stretch to call it an archetype. But perhaps accurate in this case. He's a genius who's considered a devil by some but does good work regardless. He's got his own set of morals that seem to work well enough. You can't call him an evil character because he's forced to act and tries to make the most of it. He's content to know that no one but himself could have done a better job. Mordin comments on the responsibilities of aiding foreign species and the dangers of bypassing any true need of technology and knowledge. In the context of our history, this is a comment on how irresponsible Humans have been in founding, or rather annexing, colonies. How native Americans were used against each other. How missionaries brought civilization to the "primitive" indigenous people of South America. Or how industrial Europe carved Africa into pieces for its own needs. And with that brought modern weapons into African tribal wars. Wars originating in no small way from the colonization. The Krogan are the analogy.

There are more biblical analogies. Miranda has been made out of the rib of her "father". Tali is a cloaked virgin, untouched, aloof, naive - though Shepard gets a chance to change all that. Garrus is John the Baptist, not quite a failed messiah but a precursor to Shepard. Jacob is symbolic of humanity standing alone. He's been separated from his father and has done just fine in constructing his life. In the story he discovers the faux-paradise his father has landed himself into, confronts the man and finds a repulsive, immoral, self-appointed hedonist King. He's a caricature of an evil, self-centered god. Jacob is disgusted and turns his back on him.

I consider myself to be somewhat of a humanist. I also consider the Mass Effect games to be one of the best games I've played these last few years. The cross-pollination between these make it extra interesting for me. Mass Effect is furthering the case that we have to see some games not only as consumer products but as carriers of information and points of view. Congratulations to the talent at Bioware for raising the bar once again. I can't wait to see where Mass Effect 3 will take us.

Game of 2009: Dragon Age: Origins

For a game that is so heavily story based I think I can still place my fondness of it on its gameplay. It had been a while since my last party based RPG. Yet, it felt familiar. As if I had switched on the light in a room I hadn't been in for years, and everything was still the way I left it.
Dragon Age (DA) feels like the distilled gentlemen's version of what a party based RPG should be. It's for people who grew up playing Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale or Neverwinter Nights. Or for the hardcore MMO players of today. It's for people who enjoy a methodical approach to combat, who enjoy tactics with an abundance of skills and spells. There's somewhat of a contradiction in there though. The thing that is most striking about this game is the evolution it shows. An evolution that has been made in the MMO genre. And it's quite a simple one at that. It's what a lot of MMO developers call the "holy trinity". It's the steady base upon which party tactics are built. The tank, the DPS and the healer. These classes are mirrored in the base classes of the game. The Warrior (tank), the rogue (DPS) and mage (healer). Of course there's plenty of cross-over so Warriors or Mages can have a DPS build, and there's class specializations that push characters into a certain direction, change party tactics or just make a class excel even more in what they are supposed to do.
But it's no wonder that Dragon Age has been called a single player MMORPG. And that's a good thing. A single player game can sidestep most of what is (almost) impossible to do in an MMO, and that is to have a lasting effect in the game world. Cause and effect is also one of DA most remarkable features. From beginning to end there are choices that have to be made and most, if not all, have some sort of effect, either small or big, later in the game. No other company but Bioware has been quite so adept at crafting a narrative structure like this in such a cohesive and new universe.

Congratulations Bioware, again! Dragon Age: Origins is my personal Game Of The Year 2009. Other possible contenders were Team Fortress 2, Street Fighter 4, Dawn Of War 2, Modern Warfare 2 and Torchlight.

There's a few more thoughts I'd like to share about DA. There seems to be an overarching storyline, regardless of the player's chosen origin and it's that of mages versus the Chantry. In modern terms one would call it Science versus Religion. A theme that really speaks to me. The mages being represented by the Circle of Magi and several independent more experimental mages. The Chantry is a matriarchal church lording over the Circle with an army of Templars. Who are basically Paladins - church warriors - who've been conditioned through indoctrination and Lyrium, the game's fuel for magic, to hunt down Rogue or dangerous mages. Their partial immunity for magic stems from training and lyrium addiction but destroys their mind in the end. The setup for this hierarchy of powers is because Mages have the potential to bring Demons into the physical world if they are not able to resists their seductions in the fade. The fade is the game's version of the dream world into which mages can enter with full awareness. For those who've read any of Terry Pratchett's discworld novels the fade will sound familiar, it really is quite like the dungeon dimensions.
Not only that but mages are blamed for the existance of the Dark Spawn, the games main evil force. It has been told by the Chantry that the quest for knowledge, power and a mission to usurp the Maker (The Chantry Deity) from his throne in the fade has transformed these mages into the first of the Darkspawn as part of a godly punishment. However, if so, where do new darkspawn come from? The games only shows mages transforming into abominations, either physically or mentally. Whether the crime and punishment is symbolic or not, the events are still pinned on mages without actual proof. Later in the game the player character discovers that darkspawn are actually born through a brood mother, like a spider giving birth to live offspring. Further claims of Chantry lies are found in ancient records. Potraying it's most important figurehead, the Prophetes Andraste (the game's equivalent to Jesus, Mohammed or maybe more accurate: Jeanne d'Arc), was not a chosen by the Maker but in fact a very powerful Mage with a political agenda. To further justify the credibility of the claim, it was found in the Shaperate. The Dwarven records of History who have no truck with the Chantry. Their spiritual system being based on ancestors rather than Gods. If all this turns out to be true, and it propably will, in this game universe, that means the Chantry is indeed lying to its followers and duping everyone fortunate enough to have magical talents.
This leads me to believe that in further Dragon Age stories the Chantry will turn out to be the hidden evil pulling strings in order to maintain its power and control. The motivation to keep mages down is the fact that they could ascertain the truth about the makers place, or lack thereof, in the fade. A truth that would shatter the Chantry's credibility. There's even more. The player is almost always able to choose an Atheïst answer whenever religious questions or favors are asked. Answers that range from scepticism to mockery.

This might be a crackpot theory but... The Chantry's setup seems synonymous to the Roman Catholic church and its imperialism of the western world. It may well be that Humanists everywhere might have an ally in the Bioware docters, Ray Muzyka and Greg Zeschuk, and their colleagues as voices in this ever more powerful medium. If you want some more proof, please remind yourself of Mass Effect. Where dogmatic belief in the Protheans was dispelled by the relevation of the Reapers. Where near-holy artifacts fall into the profane because facts deemed them to be. Baldur's Gate and Knights of the Old Republic had equally shocking revelations. Discovery and disillusion has been a trope in Bioware games for some time.

Intermezzo

By the lack of new posts it seems as if have been avoiding this blog. I almost have, because it would mean having to look at the date of my last post. A new post was always being conceptualized and then postponed. Not being one to feel guilty, I would rather look the other way and focus on the realities that are more rewarding in the short term. And so, I've been gaming in my spare hours. Like a rat in a Skinner box, I've pressed buttons in arcane sequences to get my sweet reward. And these lasts few months I've been a glutton. The need for relaxation has been in direct relation to the amount of work I've been doing. Where one would grow, so would the other. In short, it's been a very productive period. Both in the professional world as in the Skinner box. To the outside world it seems as if all I do is press buttons, wearing out keyboards, mice and Wacom pens. The same world that sees me effortlessly produce artwork and get satisfaction out of pressing buttons in order to make a game play itself, is starting to think that it actually takes no effort at all.
On both accounts, it is wrong.
My tasks are Crucial as to deserve capitalization and the games I play are as brilliant as any great Belgian novel. Or so I keep telling myself. In the eyes of some one in the know, I must seem like an intellectual of the modern age. Yet to some one in the real world, it must seem like a lazy office jockey who earns a living by letting the computer do all the hard work for him and is addicted to pressing buttons at night. I must have been the nightmare of the previous age. An overqualified hippy with nonsensical morals based on a fantasy world of dreams and drugs. Someone who doesn't know how to take life serious and doesn't know what it is to do actual work. My parents used to threaten me with this actual work by saying: "If you don't do good at school, you'll spend the rest of your life carrying a lunchbox to a factory".

And so, after completing not one but two higher diplomas, one of which is on par with a university degree, I got a creative job that pays reasonably well. However, irony has it that now my parents wag their finger at me for not knowing what actual work is, and that I should probably do more of it, instead of letting the computer work late and playing those silly little games on it when it's done. So on to my blog where I talk about games and only hint at the work I pretend to do!
The next part is about a few games I played, and it's there because I told the blog posting algorithm to mention the names I input before leaning back and sipping my tea. I also mentioned it to write in a manner to attract lustful females and to garner world fame. I'm not expecting it to be flawless, two out of three objectives met is still an acceptable result.

I've played and enjoyed Need For Speed: Shift. The demo convinced me of its quality, and I bought it shortly after. I've always appreciated racing games. Mostly for their obsessive compulsion gameplay of driving a car efficiently. My last serious racing effort was Xpand Rally some years ago and more recently Mario Kart Wii, so I'm hardly an authority on the subject. NFSS has a sense of speed of a roller-coaster, and that's what makes it rather special. Racing a car on one of its tracks feels like controlling a rocket powered skateboard on the downwards slope of an active vulcano. The game has a leg up on other racing games in its style and it's truly phenomenal cockpit view. I've also been known to call it "Top Gear: the game". There isn't much to talk about with this game - there's no higher understanding of life because of it. On my parents scale of approval it would propably score to be "very silly indeed". What they don't know is that I'm using these racing games as a simulator in order to easily acquire a real driver's license. This is, of course, using my parent's mindset that, if games like call of duty are ruthless murder training devices, racing games must be ideal in order to be a driver.

To make matters even worse, I've been dabbling in satanism and demonology! It's no wonder that my feeble Atheist mind would one day succumb to the seduction of the beast itself. Because what could be worse then playing Dungeons and Dragons? Why a computer game that is the tier3 evolution of D&D! And why is this evil ruleset so evil? Because it's a ruleset that's been streamlined in such a way that the computer does all the calculating! Truly this is a magnitude of wickedness not seen in any game all year! (HINT)
Because of it's inherent didactic nature the game teaches among other things: magic, lesbianism, homosexualism, alcoholism, unholy and generally shady dealing, pick-pocketing, cursing, cursing, smuggling, drug trafficking, genocide and worst of all, blasphemy. The name of this unthinkable yet unbelievably seductive abomination is Dragon Age:Origins. On the caring parent's scale this game has fallen of the "silly" and into the "dead serious". It'd probably only be remedied, and I saved, by sacrificing one's eldest son, namely: me.
Or perhaps it's only a phase.
Either way. The game has left me a powerless thrall unable to appreciate any other game.

Self-prescribed medication has been ordered in the form of Modern Warfare 2: murder simulator and Torchlight:Even more devils and demons.

World War 2: The movie: Inglourious Basterds

A little word up front to my readership that might not be interested in the usual game rambling that is the norm around here. This post deals mostly with popular culture AND LOTS OF SPOILERS.

It's impossible to ignore the impact the second world war had on the world we know today. It was also quite a long time ago. And indeed our first hand source of information is slowly drying up. Even so, Hitler and his Nazis are still very popular. Popular boogeymen that is. Given the time that has past since that gruesome event, the world has had time to acclimate to the hard, cold facts, and has learned to live with it. What humans are capable of. This new-found freedom has allowed us to get a little more creative with the whole notion of a world at war. Break up the protagonists of the war into cartoonish achetypes. And Nazis have become a literary archetype. Comparable to the undead or vampires. In which case Adolf Hitler becomes a modern day Count Dracula. Now, these archetypes are coming from their dark sub-cultural recesses, such as games and comics, into the mainstream.

I recently saw the new Tarantino Movie Inglourious Basterds. This movie is a stylish expression. If you'd compare this movie to the likes of Saving Private Ryan or Band of Brothers. The difference is immediately clear. This is a creative interpretation. And presents an interesting point of view.

Adolf Hitler, who looks nothing like his real life counterpart for good reason, in this movie has been portrayed as a deranged German Bonaparte wannabe, simple minded, psychotic and bent on the destruction of every Jew on the globe. He bursts in saliva spitting laughter when watching the movie National pride. The film (in a film) is basically about the typical rambo-esque spraying of bullets (from a bolt action rifle no less) and people hitting the floor. It's the heroic tale of a sniper sitting in a bell tower killing a cohort of allied soldiers in Italy. The allied stupidity shown through a brief conversation between an allied soldier and his commanding officer: "Commander, we must destroy that tower!" upon which the commander replies in stoic fashion "Not a chance.". Followed by the camera cutting to more allies getting shot or falling from windows. With his combat knife, our hero sniper carves a swastika with impressive shading into the floorboard of his bell tower as a reprise from the killing. This is, of course, hailed with loud cheering and applause from the Nazi Brass in the theater. It's a boneheaded piece of propaganda. A power trip. It's what we could call gun porn. Hitler exclaims to Goebbels "This is your best movie yet!". Goebbels is moved to tears by the complement. A condemnation perhaps on the director's behalf. Tarantino is comparing people who enjoy the gun porn movies to this caricature of Hitler. And I guess this would also count towards people who play first person shooter games as well. If they are played for the simple reason of shooting people and marvel at the carnage in sadistic enjoyment. It might also be a wake-up call to every person in the audience who was laughing at the fact that Nazis were getting brutally murdered or mutilated on screen. These said Nazis were in many cases presented as normal people with morals, principles and dreams. Like the sergeant that meets his demise at the hands of the so-called Jew Bear. The latter points at the Sergeant's Iron Cross and asks him "Did you get that for killing Jews?" at which he gets an honest reply "For courage". Implying that he did not fight this war to kill Jews, but rather to protect his homeland. And of course, it's rather absurd to believe that all German soldiers were psychopaths. The reply falls on deaf ears, it is not the version of reality a determined person on a quest for revenge wants to hear.

But for as many incompetent German officers the movie has, there are competent Nazis, you could call them villains if not for the fact the movie portraits them simply as officers on duty. These characters radiate an air of tension, their friendly face the impenetrable facade for the calculating detective inside. Such is the Gestapo Officer in the cellar meeting. And such is Hans Landa, played by Christoph Waltz, who is arguably the most enjoyable character in this story. And arguably the most impressive villain since Heath Ledger's Joker. The very opening part of the movie is as tense as the it gets. And is one among a series of unbearable, deafening, tense and discomforting moments. All of these come to a loud, abrupt and somewhat violent end. At first glance a likable character, bearing a big bright smile, speaking kind words in a multitude of languages. He is shrewd however, seems to know just about everything and acts with deadly precision. The war seems to be a game to him, played by rules and a mutual respect between prey and predator. This almost childlike trust in these rules are eventually his folly. His professional mercenary logic is quite sound however. Unfortunantly for him though, some characters carry a grudge that is rather unprofessional.

You might have noticed I'm glossing over the story and possible meaning of the Inglourious Basterds squad. But then, what's to say? These characters are rather simple and honest in many possible ways. They're out for revenge, and get it. Aldo Raine, the squad sergeant played by Brad Pitt is an uncomplicated ruffian. And it's amazing how many times the Basterds serve as comic relief. Most noticeably when they present themselves to be Italians. Perhaps the most interesting fact about the Basterds is that they are Jews killing Nazis, in it self this isn't anything special, but in the context of the film, and add to that the characters of Shosanna and Marcel, it leads to a remarkable reversal, namely that, from a Nazi's point of view, the übermensch is undone by the hands of the undermensch.

I did not feel good as I walked out of the movie theater. This piece of cinema is rough, like the screeching of a fork on a blackboard. And contradictionary as it might sound, I enjoyed it thoroughly. That's because I had a lot to think about. And because I could, this blog post exists.