More Inglorious Bastards Casting

This just keeps getting better and better. I wanted to see “Inglorious Bastards” pretty bad for the sake of it being a Tarantino picture, but this cast is making me drool.

…are you serious? Simon Pegg kicks ass.

John, you are the most negative person I’ve come across since I started coming to this site. Eli Roth is slated to have a small role, so why give a damn? “Shaun of the Dead” was the best zombie movie in years and years, and Brad Pitt is a well-respected actor. Just because someone is frequently in the limelight doesn’t mean they’re not talented. And “Samuel L. Hackson”? What the hell is that? That’s not even a good play on words.

John, I hope you’re really satisfied with how cool you are in your head.
What’s this “real art” you’re talking about? Probably some pretentious arthouse shit that reflects you as a person? That’s my best guess, at least. But seriously, I’d like to know what movies have elevated you above all of us simple morons, just by seeing its pictures and hearing its sounds.
Movies are a form of entertainment. Everything doesn’t have to be “art.”

…sounds like a cop-out of an answer to me. It also kind of sounds like you don’t know what art even looks like on film, especially because Quentin Tarantino has never made an artful film. Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction were extremely entertaining films, but they were a far cry from art.
I’m a lost cause because when I ask for an explanation, you can’t back yourself up? I wouldn’t expect someone to understand me either if I was that uncertain and uncommitted to my beliefs to put forth a genuine explanation.
You want art? Watch some Kubrick or vintage Scorsese. If you’re into the obscure, try some early David Lynch on for size, see how it fits. But Quentin Tarantino films are not artistic, not one bit. They are big, booming, bloody rollercoaster rides that are a great deal of fun and entertainment. Something people like you would describe as “kitsch.”
By the way, smart guy, you spelled “you’re” wrong.