Sharon Waxman (hat tip: Jeffrey Wells) says that Universal and The Weinstein Company are pressuring Quentin Tarantino to cut Inglourious Basterds by 40 minutes before its August 21 release. Not sure whether to believe this report—and I’d be grateful to have it proven wrong—since Waxman follows her claim by misstating the film’s current running time. (Although when it was 160mins when it was accepted to Cannes, by the time Tarantino locked it, it was a slightly shorter 152mins, according to the Variety review, or—UPDATE—147mins, according to Anne Thompson’s Cannes interview with the director, who was then considering adding at least one scene.) But Nikki Finke suggested something similar last week. All I can say—as someone who thought Basterds was the unquestionable highlight of this year’s Cannes competition—is that cutting won’t remove what’s strange about the film; it’ll just ruin its pacing and structure—and probably outrage QT’s sizable fanbase. The charge against the movie is that it’s “talky” and that too much of it is subtitled to appeal to a mass audience. But if any contemporary filmmaker has proven that large swaths of dialogue can be compelling, even profitable, it’s Tarantino. And as others have noted, parts of Kill Bill were subtitled—the main difference here being that the Weinsteins were presumably in better financial straits in 2003 and 2004. Which version of Basterds would you rather see?