quick tell us about frederick and shoshanna before they blow up
Please pardon my late reply... I fear that both Fredrick and Shoshanna have blown up by now, but I will take care to answer this regardless - it is moreso a critique on their relationship, an analyses of what was going through Fredrick's head throughout the film, and what Tarantino has said on the matter.
I believe that, while Tarantino is undeniably great at world building when it comes to his cinematic universes, that he also somehow lacks a deeper understanding of his characters, and I find his takes to be very surface-level, especially citing what he has said in the past about Shoshanna and Fredrick - obviously, he is the writer of the story, and is entitled to his own opinions and such, but I as a consumer of his work am also entitled to my own interpretations and such, hence this post.
I completely disagree with all of the Romeo / Juliet comparisons that he makes in reference to Shoshanna and Fredrick... "...And to me, at the end, there's an almost Romeo and Juliet quality to their end. And in a different time, things could have been different."
Plus, "...But not that she has full sympathy for him, and there's not a thing with them, but there's something between them, some kind of odd chemistry," I also simply cannot get behind.
Moreover, I think that it is a complete disservice to Shoshanna's character in specific. He's said in another interview before that Fredrick was in love with Shoshanna, and that his feelings were genuine, and... oh, please, spare me the grief.
The only reason why Fredrick was so infatuated with Shoshanna was precisely because of the fact that she refused to give him the time of day; I'd reckon being a "Hero of the Reich" and whatnot, that he was no doubt used to women tripping over their own feet to swoon about him, and in the very instant that he met a woman whom was so unlike the rest, he found that she was a puzzle to be solved, or more of a trophy to be won over - hence his insistent pursuit of her.
To have any form of love or affection for someone, you must first respect them as a person; I'd say Fredrick did NOT respect Shoshanna in the slightest, and so, how could he have possibly felt any love for her by extension? He continuously invades her personal space, oversteps boundaries that she has put up and, dare I say, did their final scene together when Fredrick bursts through the back theater door not seem a bit... rape-y, for lack of a better term, to anyone else?
Fredrick is a character that I should almost like to compare to Albie Di Grasso from The White Lotus, if anyone reading this is familiar with that show - but, my meaning is that, they both hide under the guise of respecting women, when in reality they use very subtle tactics of manipulation to harm the women in their lives; I won't say much on Albie, considering this is not a The White Lotus blog (however, it used to be, before my rebrand, I suppose), but I will cite how Fredrick is constantly twisting Shoshanna into uncomfortable positions; their initial meeting, whence he again approaches her in the café, when Hellstrom is sent to retrieve and bring her to the whole Reich-strudel-brunch-social-call with Fredrick, Hans, Goebbels and company, their final scene together, etcetera. If he had truly and honestly held any ounce of regard for Shoshanna, he'd have respected her disinterest from the very beginning, and left that poor woman alone. But, the man is tenacious, I suppose.
This is not to say that I dislike Fredrick, either, readers; I know that I am constantly berating him in my posts - and that also isn't to say that he doesn't annoy me, because he absolutely does - in fact, he annoyed me perhaps the most out of all of the evil little men in that film. The only reason I could stomach him was because of Daniel Brühl. What a cutie he is. I want to frolick with him in a field of daisies. More specifically Paul Krantz, I'd much like to frolick with.
hi! i just wanted to ask, after reading your answer on the neo nazi thing, what is your (controversial?) opinion on religion. just curious to know, i'm not asking to feel like a superior judge, i'm just genuinely curious and i liked the way you phrased what you wanted to say! also, if it's too oot for the blog to answer here, i hope to hear from you in private chat. hope have a good day !! :)
Hallo! Thanks for the inquiry. You strike me as very polite. This is likely the nicest-phrased ask I've received. What a lovely person you seem to be.
For this response to make any sense, I've got to provide some context as to my (relevant) personal beliefs and upbringing, which are as follows;
Religion is something I've thought long and hard on for the majority of my life; for context, I was raised Catholic, and taught to believe in God from an early age. It wasn't until my late adolescence, I will say, perhaps my early teenage years, that I began to doubt his existence, because I'd started to gain a broader perspective on the world around me. What had seemed like divine justice and "God's plan" just a few years ago, no longer made any sense to me; in fact, human suffering in general, all seems quite senseless to me, as the vast majority of humans are docile and benevolent creatures, and undeserving of the circumstances that fate has brought upon them.
I could not understand why an "all-merciful God" seemingly lacked mercy for his own creations; "everything happens for a reason," but that's not necessarily an accurate enough saying, is it? Well, I don't think so. There is senselessness in life, and senselessness in death. If we really ponder on it, there is no sense - sense doesn't exist. Nothing really exists, either. Everything is as everyone perceives it to be. Life is constant entropy, and so is existence, in and of itself; one day, I will die. One day, you will die. Someday, everyone on the planet will die, and humanity will be no more, and such is a fact. In the grand scheme of things, we are all living for nothing, if not to enjoy what fleeting moments of happiness are granted to us. Furthermore, I don't like to think that my life is all apart of some greater scheme, or a plan, that someone beyond my capabilities and understanding as a human possesses. I am here because I have struggled to get here; not because a God had a plan for me and my life.
To make it clear, as I feel that my above statements have been rather vague, I do not believe in God, but I also do not NOT believe in God. The reason for my skepticism is partly because he never answered any of my prayers, and I began to feel a bitter kind of resentment as time passed, before it gradually descended into complete incredulity.
Many people expect me to say that I am disbelieving because I have never seen Him, or heard Him, or felt Him; if I'd said that, I'd be a hypocrite, so I won't - after all, we cannot see air, yet all humans are supposed that air is what keeps us alive. I'd like to use the same logic in this case; even if God were to present Himself to me (which he ought not to, for He should be quite ashamed of His playing truant in my life), I would still not believe in Him - I would not follow His teachings, or abide by his regulations - for He hasn't ever, even for a moment, proved to me that He is worth believing in.
To answer the question plainly, my 'controversial' opinion on the matter, is that religion as a whole, ought to be abolished as a concept. For the most part, it is not used for its intended purposes to unite, but rather, it divides, and breeds conflict amongst the people. Religion even has a very large seat at the table where politics are concerned; people like to try and separate the two, but I think that these people are idealists, and that, these two things are much more entwined at this point than they should be, and more than most people would think. In a perfect world, of course, yes, I agree, that religion should have no place in politics. But speaking on the state of the world today, and on history, they've nearly always been hand-in-hand; for example, I'll cite abortions, and abortion rights, as is a major talking point in today's politics (at least in the states).
Before I do that, let me clarify that I am, obviously, a male, biologically and psychologically, and that, the struggles women face, I cannot comprehend, or ever hope to; an abortion is something that I will never have to consider, because it is simply not in my physiology. However, I owe it to my mother, and to every other woman in my life to have a firm opinion on the matter, because having no opinion somehow seems to me to be in equivalence to complacency.
What a woman does with her body is, frankly, none of my business, and nor is it anyone else's, besides the woman. The fact that when Roe versus Wade was overturned, there was not a single woman in that room whence the decision was being contemplated, is absolutely sickening - the fact that we have men dictating legislation on women's rights and issues, is abhorrent. So, let me be clear, that I am absolutely pro-choice, no matter the circumstances.
If we look on the opposite side of this, which would be pro-life, I can point out a hundred different ways as to how the predominant amount of arguments urging against pro-choice are rooted in religion, and religious beliefs, moreso Christianity; wanting to protect the sanctity of life (as in Catholic theology, it is widely believed that life begins the moment of conception), a majority of churches and other religious organizations (pertaining to Christianity and Catholcism, naturally) advocating in support of the pro-life movement, doctrinal positions appearing in scriptures in which they allude to the opposition of abortion, etcetera.
All of this to essentially say, that yes, religion plays a major role in politics. It's difficult, if not, impossible, to attempt to divide the two when they are so neatly entwined. I find it absurd that people try and refute this.
TL;DR – Religion should collectively be abolished, and I talk far too much. Keep in mind that, the few reasons I listed to support my opinion are not the only reasons why I think this - I could have gone about citing all of my reasons with basic explanations on them, but this response is already far too long. I could do this in a separate post as well, however, even this I am reluctant to upload... hence why I am not using tags, because I do not need religious fanatics flocking to my comments in search of a debate, haha.
Have you seen any other Tarantino movies besides Inglorious Basterds? If so, what, and did you like them?
Hallo, anon! Thanks for the query. I do love a good film query.
Even though Inglourious Basterds is a film that I quite enjoy, I really struggle to say for certain whether it's one of my favorites of all time – which may come as a shock, considering I have an entire blog dedicated to it, but it's the truth.
As for Tarantino specifically, I have seen the basics, but am not a die-hard fan; and so, all of the Kill Bill films, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, and Pulp Fiction. Before anyone comes for my head, Reservoir Dogs and Django I will be watching soon, thanks muchly.
I thought the Kill Bill films were solid. Again, not my favorites, but I do like Uma Thurman, and so I mostly watched them for her. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood was the first Tarantino film that I ever picked up, but not a favorite. I am an avid Dicaprio hater, and so seeing him on my screen for nearly three hours was a nightmare. Pulp Fiction (this will ruffle some feathers, but oh, well), I didn't enjoy much. I hesitated to watch the film at first, because I took a look at the warnings and saw that there was a rape scene – I also hesitated to watch the Kill Bill films for the same reason. I do not like watching rape or assault on my screen; yes, big shocker. I really don't even like it being mentioned. It's why I check the warnings of a film before I watch it. If I see anything like that, I instantly take it off of my list, and make a mental note not to pick it up in the future (I made the mistake of not doing this when I watched Mysterious Skin for the first time, and that is still by far, the movie I most hate out of every film I have watched – I thought it was disgusting, and a complete disservice to victims. Yes, I will die on this hill. I do not like the director either. Everyone involved in the making of this film, I've also made a note not to ever watch any of their projects either. Call me petty). Anyhow, some people say that I am soft for this, but it is just a matter of personal preference. I think rape, assault, or sex in general, bring nothing to a film, and is mainly thrown in to service the fans. And if it really must be involved somehow, well, why do I have to see it? Best to imply it, in my opinion.
Typing this up has made me realize that I really don't care for Tarantino's films, haha. He is good at what he does, I will admit. But I think he is a bit pretentious. I probably would be if I'd made Inglourious Basterds. Uma Thurman and Samuel L. Jackson in Pulp Fiction were the only parts of the film I enjoyed. I'll be skinned for this, surely, but I won't lie, as much as I am a bootlicker for IB.
And as is customary (I always seem to make apologies following a query), I'm again, really sorry for veering off track about irrelevant things. I should put a disclaimer near my queries box that says, "If you ask me anything at all, then expect for me to touch on any vaguely-relevant topic without fail. I am going to go on a tangent, and the reply will be about... roughly 20% addressing the actual question at hand."
Seems a lot like you tried to move around the question the other anon sent about neo nazis. I don't blame you. It's a hard discussion to tackle and you like to keep your space non argumentative, so I can easily see how this happened. I personally just block and move around them. They're majorly corn balls and edge lords with their own gripes and I'd rather not engage with such individuals but it's nice knowing I can find like minded people in this scarce fandom.
Hallo anon. Admittedly, I had to do a bit of a double take whilst reading the little snippet of this query in my inbox, for I was certain I'd be 'catching heat,' or whatever the English saying is. This response will likely be a bit disorganized, as it's not often I receive queries regarding my immediate personal opinions, or views on any given topic – mostly, as is obvious to anyone with a set of eyes that views my account, I receive asks about Inglourious Basterds-related or adjacent topics, haha. Even still, that's not to dissuade anyone from broaching such other topics with me; a query is a query, and I answer any and all of them.
Truthfully, I didn't feel as if I was evading the topic, for lack of a better term, but was attempting to keep my reply semi-neutral in stance, since the inquiry wasn't outright asking for my political opinions and / or stances, but rather, simply requested why politics of that particular manner were so rampant in the community – with that being said, I can most definitely see how my response may have come off as tip-toey, or lackluster in some respects. It is not that I would like to keep my space non-argumentative, I'd say (in fact, debates are something I quite enjoy), it is moreso that I'm certain of my self-control and devices when engaging in a debate, however, cannot account for the other person's self-control, I suppose. Not that passion is, per se, an awful thing to have during a debate. I think that passion can be a tool, when used correctly – but then again, passion is partly to blame for most of the conflict in the world today. Even so, if people had no passion, well, I don't really want to imagine that world either, for it seems bleak and desolate.
Essentially, I am reluctant to share some opinions I may have, because again, I cannot account for another person's thought process or internal opinions. Maybe they disagree with my opinion and lash out. It's like driving a car; you know you're a fair driver. You abide by traffic laws, you do not speed, you never run red lights – and still, all it takes is someone else doing any number of those things, and you're struck and killed. For someone like me, who values control, driving a car is my worst nightmare, because I cannot manage any of those ugly little variables while driving; that is, other people are those 'ugly little variables'. So I suppose that's why I came off the way I did in the aforementioned post. I don't want to get hit by a metaphorical semi-truck, haha.
With that being said, I'll be honest and forthcoming when I say this, so that this post isn't misconstrued – and really, it's a shame I even have to clarify this; but I am not a Nazi. I've received a few direct messages recently that really seem adamant on labeling me one, because I suppose some people think that fiction = reality, and because I have a profile photo of a fictional character, well, it must be Major Hellstrom of the Gestapo that runs this account, surely. And, just so that I cover all of my bases; I am also not a Neo-Nazi, or a Hitler apologist, or an SS-enthusiast (just to be clear, my strife is not directed towards you, anon).
Even then, I do have some opinions regarding the subject of religion that I'm sure would be considered controversial, and that I'm also certain a lot of people would have me struck down for – not that these opinions are morally reprehensible, mind you, it's simply that the general public would disagree very vehemently with me. Still, it isn't like I take great care to clutch my pearls and political opinions to myself – if anyone asks, I am perfectly honest, and it isn't like I'm secretive about it; in fact, I am loudly open with my political opinions, and anyone who knows me personally can vouch for this – just not on this account, haha.
Regardless, it's the internet, and so I have to be careful what I say and all, especially considering the whole country is in the midst of a... dare I say, that it's a dictatorship right now? Digital footprint and all, and that, it's better to be safe than sorry.
Anyhow, this went on for entirely too long, so apologies for that – my thoughts always tend to veer off course, and I can never conjure up a straightforward answer it seems.
Are you interested in writing any fics in the future? I do love your analysis of things and would love to see that translated into a narrative story.
Hallo, anon! Thanks muchly for the kind words. I always love to hear that my fellow Tumblr citizens find my analyses sufficient. It's all very heartwarming, which is vital in these trying times (if you live in the states, then you know exactly what I'm speaking on - that is, this blasted weather. It's completely dreary and miserable. I've taken to ordering the tiniest, most pathetic portable heater to keep warm. I'd be better off in Alaska than here).
A previous query I replied to touched on this topic very vaguely - as I've said, I have written fics in the past (none relevant to IB unfortunately), but haven't in a long while. It's been a few years. The last time I took to writing any sort of piece was a few months ago, say, October, for a literary assignment submission; it was meant to be under one hundred words, but I'm a passionate man, and so suffice it to say it ended up being somewhere within the 4,000-5,000 word range. And I was really quite irate, because my professor never gave me any feedback for the story, and I relented to brewing in anger for over it for months afterwards. It followed a man named Bolnodin in nineteenth century Russia, and his evident descent into madness - he drives himself dead over the guilt of the wrongdoings he'd committed throughout his life. Think of it as if Raskolnikov's story had been devised by Bulgakov instead, and not Dostoevsky - that's how I can most accurately describe the style of writing I undertook.
Anyhow, here I am, veering off course again. You all must be sick of my ramblings in these posts. 'Look at this buffoon, he can't keep a train of thought going! Look how the train crashes!' I know you're thinking it, and I am, too. Apologies, citizens. The train is back on the tracks, I promise.
Would I ever take up writing fics again? I never want to entirely rule out a possibility, for passion may once again strike me someday, and I'll jinx myself right here and now if I say no - but for the time being, likely not. I delight in my own stories too much to rewrite renditions of one's that have already been thought up. As I've said, however, I won't entirely rule out the possibility.
However, will I take to writing analyses again? Very likely. I've been thinking much about that fool Tarantino and his apparent lack of understanding in his own characters... I most definitely would like to make a post about Fredrick and Shoshanna's relationship someday soon. So perhaps look forward to this at least.
Do you have any fic recs from the fandom? I know the content creation scene is sparse and few in between but I might've missed some great content. Any pairing is fine because I want something with a lot more on character exploration
I wish that I possessed a more sufficient answer to this query, however the unfortunate truth is that I don't indulge very much in fanon fics anymore. When I was much younger I was more involved in the fanfiction scene, and even wrote a few stories myself for various fandoms - I have always been an avid lover of literature, and still am - but nowadays I've mostly confined myself to reading classic literature (unrelated, but even though I do not write fics anymore, I do write short stories of original characters and such - such is my creative outlet, since I am poor at all else). It's something about being able to hold the book in your hands and to possess it that always enamored me more than online media had. I also find that some of the characterizations oftentimes are a bit lackluster, and so I prefer to stick to canon content (although, as you said anon, canon content is sparse). With that being said, since I've not read a single IB fic, I regrettably do not have any recommendations for you. However, if anyone else would like to chime in and leave a recommendation or two in the comments, that'd be wonderous, and I'd be perfectly inclined to take a peek.
I deeply believe that Landa sounds vaguely reminiscent of Steve Naghavi of the group And One. Every time that I listen to their music I pretend that Landa is lulling me to rest, and I sleep like a baby every time. Does this count as a 'shit post'? Consider this my first.
To begin with, I do love the fanon dynamics that I see between Landa and Hellstrom - I wish we'd have gotten IB in an episodic format, and the two surely would have had screentime together. Other than that, fanon interpretations of Hellstrom and Zoller, I also enjoy. And, this is unrelated, but out-of-universe interpretations as well. For instance, August Diehl and Daniel Brühl did a film together some years ago, Love in Thoughts, and I thought the relationship between their two characters was quite lovely. The film is surely worth a watch. Also relevant, is that August Diehl and Christoph Waltz also did a film together titled Die Braut, and so I enjoy those two characters together as well - that's Fritz Von Stein and Herzog Carl August.
Other that that, I admittedly don't consume much content involving the Basterds, so have little to say there. I don't care much for Landa and Raine, which may or may not put me in the fire pit... although I did quite like Shoshanna and Marcel. Shame we did not see much more of them.
Opinions on the state of the IB fandom and the fact that there are so many neo-nazis running around?
Oh, boy. This is quite a good query, I must admit.
I'll start off firstly by addressing the beginning aspect of the question, which is, my opinions on the Inglourious Basterds' fandom as of late, and then secondly, by lots of talks of politics, as is to be expected by the nature of the topic at hand.
To begin with, and on a somewhat unrelated note (to preface before I dive into the juicy stuff), I do believe that the fandom is quite dead, or at least, nearly so. Between Tumblr and TikTok, these are really the only dual platforms where I see the fandom has much footing, and despite that, it still seems in shambles – this is, by the way, not to dismiss those few sparse creator accounts whose content I do enjoy, however, as one says, "it takes a village" and, something, something. Well, the village is barren, lets be frank, citizens, and has been for a while.
I don't wish to speak too much on this fact of the matter further, because the additional half of the query is much more riveting to me – anyone who is acquainted with me personally knows that I am very vocal about my political affiliations, opinions and stances – and with that, unapologetic. I am not here to persuade others' into my own views; opinions exist for a reason, and there will always be conflict, no matter what, without exceptions (that's what "they" want – conflict creates division, and division schisms community – without community, we, the people, are nothing). I am also not here to debate anyone; if someone is not open-minded and unwilling to be educated, then I don't bother talking to brick walls. And so if you're the type who doesn't fancy politics, now is the time to click off.
Let's talk about Neo-Nazi's. Why do I think they are so comfortable within this fandom? To point out the obvious, and for one, because of the simple fact that, well, that is what the film is about; Nazi's. Obviously I am going to dig deeper than this, for if you're familiar with my content, then you'll know that I do love a good analysis – because of the climate that we are all in. And I say "we" as a collective, because this includes everyone around the world. WE are all living in a world dominated by fascism and injustice, especially those currently in the states, including myself. When you switch on the television nowadays and you see active elected officials handing out praises to Hitler, and mimicking the man's own salute, it's no wonder that Nazi's have come out of the woodwork, because we've given them an environment to become comfortable in, and furthermore, thrive in, even.
Let's call it what it is, it is a dictatorship that the United States is currently being withheld in. The officials are corrupt. The news stations feed the people what they'd like to, and what they'd like to, is not the truth. People who speak out are being censored, and drowned out in the press. Knowledge is actively being withheld from us. If you cannot see it, you are either blind or a fool, plain and simple – what is happening in the present time is almost a complete repeat of the second world war, and we are on the cusp of seeing the third.
And so, why SHOULDN'T Neo-Nazi's feel comfortable running about? In the political climate that we are all in at the moment, where it seems fascism is at its peak, there really is no better time for them to unveil themselves. And with a film that has the sort of content, characters and setting that Inglourious Basterds has, it's only natural they'd be inclined towards it; especially considering in some areas of the film, I can argue that the content seems to glorify, or to be rash, ennoble, Naziism itself (if someone would like me to make a separate post on this, I certainly will – however, it'd be far too lengthy for me to elaborate on here).
Anyhow... well, it's better for me to stop here, really. I've kept this account mostly apolitical thus far, not because I'd liked to, but because it hadn't felt practical to voice such opinions on an account such as this, what with it being fandom-oriented and such. Now that this query has been posed, however, it's impossible to deny that politics are relevant here and, really, in everything.
As always, thanks muchly for the query, as I did quite enjoy responding to this one in particular – for a man like me to dislike a query, I'd have to be asked something truly horrid, something dog-related, likely. I'm not fond of dogs. Don't send me queries about dogs. Not that anyone has, but if anyone was thinking to, well, rid the thought from your head immediately. I hope the response was sufficient, anyway.
'Nr. 599' = 'Number 599', likely in reference to his identification card number.
'(Gültig bis 31.12.44)' = '(Valid until the thirty-first of December, 1944)', and / or the date he'd either have to have a newer card reissued, or his current updated.
'Sturmbannführer' = 'Assault unit leader' – this would technically be the equivalent of a paramilitary "major," in more modern terminology.
'geb. am 4.1.1910 in Berlin' = 'Born on the fourth of January, 1910 in Berlin'. A Capricorn. That explains plenty.
'...berechtigt, das Gebäude der Geheimen Staatspolizei in Berlin, Prinz-Albrecht-Straße 8, zu betreten' = '...Authorized to enter the building of the Secret State Police in Berlin, Prinz-Albrecht-Straße 8'. This speaks for itself; the card essentially grants him 'official' access into the building he'd been stationed in for the Secret State Police, which would have been the Gestapo.
'Berlin, den 9. April 1939' = 'Berlin, the ninth of January, 1939', the date that the identification was likely authorized and / or signed by one of his superiors – below, aforementioned signature in dark blue, and to the left of that, the corresponding authentication stamp.
And the small box of text directly underneath Dieter's identification photo vaguely states that the identification card itself does not grant the owner (in this case, Dieter) the entitlement to perform "official police duties". Ominous.
Your analyses are spectacular! Where do you find such props; is there a specific site they can be seen on? How do you know for sure that they’re official? :^)
As far as official content goes, this fandom is pretty starved. I’m wondering if there’s any info on the characters beyond the bad guys. Regardless, it’s still pretty neat to learn about the antagonists despite their nature. In my opinion it helps delve a little deeper into how much passion and historical accuracy went into the movie and characters themselves, as well as their daily lives etc etc. I’m not here to hate lol, not at all—I’m just curious!
I’m sure these are all questions I could find answers to myself, buuuut. just for the sake of asking !!…
Hallo user! Thanks muchly for the kind words, I always appreciate the nice messages people send me via inbox, especially considering the days I have had recently... my bird is dead, which is a problem, as one may assume. His name was Fleming. This is all relevant because Fleming's passing is precisely why I have not continued on with my Inglourious Basterds analyses, because I've been in an absolutely foul mood. I'd be drinking myself stupid if it weren't for the fact that I'm a lousy driver and would surely send a poor soul up to heaven with my now deceased bird if I even attempted to go down to the liquor store. The urge to weep is quickly overtaking me, so let us promptly move on.
Mostly, I scour eBay like a madman, as I have nothing better to do with my life, as you can see. eBay is the website I practically want to elope with, for there is so much to be discovered on it in terms of film props. I know for certain that Dieter's identifications are surely authentic, seeing as they were sold for auction straight off of the set equipped with certificates of authenticity. I believe it originally sold for around ~$300 USD. If anyone would like the links, please let me know in the comments, and I will be happy to oblige.
For other sources, ones that are more reliable, HeroProp.com also has Dieter's official Soldbuch booklet, and the whole site, from my understanding, specializes in selling film-used props. Unfortunately, that is the only Inglourious Basterds prop that I have found, which I can also link. Still, if one is a fan of film props in general, this site should surely be good for you as well.
YourProps.com is where I have found most of the props that I have blogged on my page, more specifically those posted by @rzm0815, who I can also link. I've no way of knowing for certain that these are authentic, and I presume that Hans' most likely is not, however all of their Inglourious Basterds props are listed as replicas, so I must assume there are sources someplace.
I do know that Shoshanna also has official documentations, although I've not gotten around to posting hers as of late, and we know why, it is because of my bird. Please pray for him, but moreso pray for me. It's no use praying for him, he is dead, he does not need prayers. The living are in need of prayers.
Anyhow, yes, I do agree that this fandom is famished of content. I've drifted to other fandoms recently (and this is also to blame for my mini hiatus) because there's no new content coming out for Inglourious Basterds, and it is awfully hard for me to remain fixated on much of anything if I'm simply not being preened and showered with content. I do wish Tarantino had gone through with his original idea to make IB episodic, and perhaps, that way, we'd have gotten more content. Lord knows Tarantino is a daft bastard. Curse him.
But, if you are looking for official content and have not yet watched the interviews, I highly recommend that you do so! Tarantino and a few of the cast members do in-depth about their characters, and it's quite fascinating to listen to how much heart went into each and every one of them. A specific bit I like is the one centered around Fredrick, and his upbringing, being raised by his elder sisters. I thought it was quite sweet, but also gave us an idea into his psyche of perhaps why he seeks female validation (Shoshanna's validation in particular) throughout the film. I must stop here, for if I keep going, it'll turn into an analytical tangent about that silly brunette, and I've got to remain on topic.
Oh, and I just finished reading the rest of your query... I have no recollection of ever stumbling upon any other characters' identifications. I doubt they were needed, or hardly necessary for the protagonists. I can see why they were created for the antagonists, for historical accuracy and such, and seeing as they'd have been required to hold identification on them at all times anyhow. I suppose Shoshanna is an exception for whatever reason.
I will get on with posting the other analyses soon (and this tidbit is directed towards another kind user who requested I make this series to begin with, so kudos to them).
And again, thanks for the query! I do love a good query, and this has surely uplifted my mood. Please let me know if this was insufficient, or if there was anything I missed and such.
The wording directly underneath 'Soldbuch' is, admittedly, quite pixelated, and I cannot make out the words. If anyone else can, please feel free to comment.
'Nr. -972-' = 'Number 972', likely in reference to either his paybook number based off of rank, but I may be mistaken.
Again, I find Fredrick's handwriting to be particularly heinous, in that it's hardly legible, even for myself. I believe it says something resembling 'crew' beneath his paybook number, but I may stand corrected.
I can't even begin to presume what those tiny Godforsaken letters are. At this rate, I ought to call a historian. The date, however, is legible, and reads '1st of April, 1944', and beside it, what is likely his rank? Maybe? Perhaps? I cannot read it. Someone send this boy back to school, his calligraphy is wretched.
Beneath the primary box on the page, we have his signature, 'Fredrick Zoller'. Whatever is beneath it is illegible. I wish that I possessed higher-quality photos, but unfortunately I do not, so I extend my sincerest apologies to the kind user who requested I go through with this analysis series, but I fear that this is shaping out to be a very lackluster post, and that I am failing you.
Beneath that, however, something that is finally discernible; 'Blutgruppe' = 'Blood group,' or blood type is also an appropriate term - his is listed as 'B'.
'Gasmaskengröbe' = 'Gas mask size', which is listed as a size two, for his appropriately tiny head to house his tiny brain. Apologies for making dearest Zoller "catch strays," or whatever the terminology is, but his handwriting has very much agitated me, and so he deserves it, in any case.
'Wehrnummet' = 'Defense number'. What could this mean? Shrug. Finally, let's just move on.
And the boy is so pretentious, that he even wrote his signature again on the back of the cover underneath his verification photo! Astounding.
___
SECOND / THIRD PAGE;
TRANSLATIONS; (From top to bottom)
PAGE TWO;
Thankfully, these pages appear to be in better lighting, which will hopefully allow for me to translate them a bit more smoothly than previously.
'Geb um... 3.7.1924... in... Potsdam' = 'Born on... July third, 1924... in... Potsdam'. Ah. So he's a youngin. That is to account for his truly scary handwriting, I suppose. And a Cancer... all right.
'Religion... kath. Stend, Beeuf...' = 'Religion... catholic. Profession...'
'Derfonalbefcrelbung' = 'Final description', and / or what would have been his initial description whenever the booklet was certified.
I presume that the first category accounts for his height? 176 cm.
Beneath that, 'oval'. No idea what this could entail. Maybe eye shape? Then again, I struggle to reason why that'd be so relevant.
'Bart... keinen' = 'Beard... none'.
The section at the top right likely refers to his build, which is listed as 'schlank', or 'slim'.
The second box, to hell with it, it's illegible.
'Augen... braŭn' = 'Eyes... brown'.
Beneath that, illegible, and beneath that... also illegible. Sorry, patrons.
His signature, which looks like children's writing, is beneath that in black-blue ink.
'Die Richtigkeit der undgerahmten Einträge auf den Seiten 1 und 2 sowie die handschriftliche Unterschrift des Eigentümers werden hiermit bestätigt un... 3. Sep. 1942... ???... 17575 Der Homp. Chef' = 'The correctness of the unbordered entries on pages 1 and 2, and the handwritten signature of the owner are hereby certified on... the third of September, 1942... ???... ???'
And beneath that, I'm uncertain what 'Dogler' is meant in this case, as it appears to be Zoller's own handwriting, if we cross reference the calligraphy and the ink color to his above signature. Even still, it appears to be his lieutenants certification signature, and we also see the ceritifation stamp in blue to the left of it.
PAGE THREE;
'Befdelnigungen' = 'Confirmations'.
The wording below that is hard to discern, but essentially translates to, 'Regarding the correctness of the admissions and ceremonies on pages 1 and 2'. Then in the table box we have; 'Birth of the Adoration', 'Date', and then a few office numbers listed. This page would refer to any applicable promotions he'd received during service.
___
THIRD / FOURTH PAGE;
TRANSLATIONS; (From top to bottom)
PAGE THREE;
The only wording that I can tell on the third page is 'troop count', 'case', and 'signal flight' - this page is likely in dedication of keeping count the battles he went to fight in, troop numbers and such.
PAGE FOUR;
This page, likewise, seems related to the above, although seems to be in charge of keeping count of the equipment used on the aforementioned battles.
___
FIFTH / SIXTH PAGE;
TRANSLATIONS; (From top to bottom)
PAGE FIVE;
This page refers to any awards he'd have received during his service, although the translations of the exact awards are too difficult to translate.
PAGE SIX;
And this page is meant to keep track of any periods of time in which he was on a leave of absence; listed, we have the following, and in this order (with some pieces of information missing);
1; Reason: Recreational leave
19. Dec. 1942
2; 28.8 to 3.10... Potsdam (August 28th to October 10th.)
Reason: Recreational leave
26. Oct. 1943
3; 12.3 to 18.3... Berlin (March 12th to March 18th.)
10. March. 1944
4; 22.5 to 30.5... Berlin (May 22nd to May 30th.)
Reason: Special leave
20. May. 1944
The specifics of his reasons for leaving are not expanded upon, however we do know for certain that he was raised by his sister's growing up, who presumably still live in Potsdam. Perhaps it was to visit them?
___
SEVENTH / EIGHTH PAGE;
TRANSLATIONS; (From top to bottom)
PAGE SEVEN;
This page is meant to serve as a certificate of competence for weapons and equipment, essentially verifying that he is properly equipped with the means and knowledge to handle weaponry and the like.
PAGE EIGHT;
And again, this appears to be a continuation of page seven, further verifying his suitability and qualifications, likely with a superior officer having signed off on such, as we can see in the right corner where the text concedes.
You have a very... naturally polite vocabulary. I suppose that's how I immediately sensed you weren't an American. Which is, sad to say most Americans don't sound extremely polite (even in the case that we are), but your fashion of speaking still intrigues me.
Hallo! Thanks muchly for the kind words again. Most people find my manner of speech difficult to follow, because I tend to use words and phrases that I suppose aren't very appropriate or typical, which is dependant on the context of the conversation, I suppose. But yes, I find that the majority of people whom I speak to and / or interact with on social media, even if they are only browsing or viewing my posts, are able to discern rather easily that English is not my first language - German, obviously, is my first, and although I learned English quite young, I cannot say with the utmost confidence that what I say, especially in real life, makes sense to others half of the time, haha.
Anyhow, you also mentioned American's, so I wanted to as well; I would not say that, being a European immigrant myself, that I find American's to be particularly "ruder" than any other given citizens of a country - in fact, I would probably say that German's tend to come off "ruder," not that we mean to be, but wherein we have a very blunt, and matter-of-fact way of speaking that American's in particularly tend to perceive as rude. Also, German history doesn't help in our case, if you understand my meaning. I could go on and on about how Hitler and his own manner of speaking, especially during his public speeches, effected how people perceive German's and our language as a whole - even nearly a hundred years later, our language is oftentimes considered "aggressive" and / or "ugly-sounding" because of some of the rough pronunciation; I consider this next part that I am about to mention to be widely-known, but I've realized that people whom aren't well-versed in WWII and its history don't actually know this - still, I will mention it anyway (and not that I doubt your knowledge either, for what it is worth, as I did check out your page before replying), but Hitler had a tendency to annunciate and overexaggerate certain German words in his speeches, in order for them to come off as more legible in audio recordings, as we know his entire meaning was to spread his idealogy and such - it's only natural that many of his speeches were recorded with the intent to be broadcasted and / or shared - I figure he presumed his aforementioned overexaggeration and over-annunciation, so to speak, would be easier for translators to pick up on down the line, and that is why he spoke as such.
Even still, as I said before, and what the primary point of this response was to be before I went off on a tirade just now (and thorough apologies for that), was that I myself don't find American's to come off as rude most of the time - it is just that now, in modern day English, I find that most casual forms of speech between English speakers are quite informal, especially when we take into account slang, abbreviations and the like, all of which escapes my understanding, haha. And so I think, European's in specific, have a more rigid way for how we formally regard others in terms of formality, whereas I could be walking down the street here in America, and a patron may stop to smile at me on the sidewalk, and may even bid me 'good morning,' or something other - in Germany, you'd likely get an odd look or two if you attempted conversation with a stranger, even if it was a simple greeting and meant in good faith. I say this frequently, but German's are sort of asocial creatures, or at least I am, and I am projecting.
Standartenführer Hans Landa's Identification Card Analysis
___
FRONT;
TRANSLATIONS; (From top to bottom)
'Dienstausweis Nr. 12356' = 'Service ID Number', likely in reference to his assigned service position ID number.
'Gültig bis 1.1.1945' = 'Valid until January 1, 1945'. Some European countries were more acquainted to scribing dates in the DD/MM/YYYY format as opposed to MM/DD/YYYY, which I presume is more common in the states - however, for clarity's sake, I will assume that the format is meant to be MM/DD/YYYY.
As for 'für' and the numbered '43,' well, I honestly have no clue what those could mean in this context - I am well-versed in WWII and its history, but even still, real ID's that were possessed by Reich officers are hard to come by, and so cross-referencing is nearly impossible for me. After all, I don't assume that these are meant to be exact replicas, but only based loosely off of an idea of what they'd looked like then.
For the lightning bolts, it'd do me no good to explain those, as for the fact that anyone who comes upon this post and who is acquainted with the fandom would know what those entail.
Right beside them, however, we see 'Standartenführer,' which translates to 'Standard Leader', or in this case, I'd suppose the term 'Officer' would also be appropriate (many German words share similarities with English ones, I've noticed, and if you are familiar with even a bit of the former, and also with ranks of the SS or NSDAP, then the ranks become less and less difficult to deduce). Anyhow, the rank was founded in 1925, and was given to SA and SS officers who commanded the 'Standarte' unit, which is the equivalent to an army battalion.
Beneath that, we have his name, 'Hans Landa', clearly. I'm unsure if this is his full name or not, but it most likely is, considering most official documents had officer's required to permit their first, middle (if applicable) and last names - maybe he has a middle name that we do not know about, like Dieter? However, it's unlikely, as we'd probably have seen it here on his ID.
'Bei der Sicherheitspolizei-leit-stelle in... Paris' = 'At the security police control center in...' 'Paris'. This would refer to the office or control center in which he'd been stationed / commissioned to reside in, which, as we see in the film, is in Paris, France.
'Der Chef der Sicherheitspolizei und des SD' = 'The head of the security police and the SD'. 'SD,' in this context, refers to the Sicherheitsdienst des Reichsführers-SS of the Nazi Party, which was their intelligence agency.
'Berlin, den... 11. January 1943' = 'Berlin, the 11th of January, 1943'. I'm unsure if this is the date he was assigned to reside in Paris? The date the ID was issued? Who knows?
Towards the bottom, in dark blue ink, we have a signature which appears to read 'Henschke.' This may be a direct reference to Hans Walter Karl Henschke, who was a real life Gestapo and SS officer. Coincidentally, he was actually stationed to Paris, France in October of 1943 as commander of the Sicherheitsdienst des Reichsführers-SS, so it's likely that he was Hans' commanding officer, and signed off on the identification card as his superior. The fact that the rank listed below Henschke's signature is 'Gruppenführer' furthers this theory of mine, seeing as it was of a higher rank than Standartenführer, if I am not mistaken.
To the left of the identification card, we have his identification photo, and listed beneath it is Hans' full name, presumably in his own handwriting.
Beneath that, '(Unterschrift des inhaberst)', which = 'Signature of the owner', which would refer to the holder of the identification card.
___
BACK;
TRANSLATION;
'Der Inhaber dieses Dienstausweises ist zum Führen auch von eigenen Waffen, sowie zum Erwerb der dazu gehörigen Munition berechtigt' = 'The holder of this service ID card is authorized to carry their own weapons and to acquire the corresponding ammunition.' This essentially gives service members of the Reich permission to carry weapons on them and whatnot, and to also carry ammunition. This part speaks for itself.
Also visible on the back of the identification card is exit holes from two bullet casings, and, of course, the identification verification stamp.
all of them interest me, so if it's not too much trouble, then i'd love to see what they all say. take as much time as you need for it, there is no rush
Very well! I was originally going to include all of the analysis' and translations in one post in response to this query, but I have since decided against doing so, as I am a stickler for organization, and thought one post would be too lengthy and convoluted; and so, I will be creating individual posts for each, making four in total (one for Hans' ID card, one for Fredrick's booklet, one for Dieter's ID card, and another final one for Dieter's booklet, likely in that order). I will attempt to have at least one finished by tonight, however it is quite late in my time, and I fear I may nod off soon - in which case, I will resume the posts tomorrow. I will start work on them now, and thanks muchly for your interest!
would you happen to know what the identification cards/booklets sayɁ̦ or what sort of information they contain?
Hallo anon! I would be happy to provide a full breakdown for any and / or all of the identification cards and booklets, if that would be to your liking? If you'd like to specify which in particular, or if you'd meant all of them, please let me know, either by commenting here, or through another anonymous inquiry, and I will happily make corresponding posts with their translations and an analysis.
Hi, oh my god i am so utterly fascinated with your vocabulary!
Hallo anon, I must admit that reading this in my inbox made me feel slightly giddy! I have been told on occasion that my manner of speech is a tad peculiar, but that is likely due to the fact that this is not my native language, and so my sentence structures and such may come off as a bit odd to those whose first language is English. Nevertheless, this made me quite happy! I have not been told this before, but I think I will take your fascination as a compliment, so many thanks to you!
