Is Quentin Tarantino an "Inglorious Basterd"?

We have been studying some quite perilous times these past weeks in AIS.  All of these times have been associated with wars, some more than others.  Though there may be things about the past that we would like to change, such as wars and civil liberties issues, any sane person knows that what's done is done.  The past can't be changed.  Quentin Tarantino, however, begs to differ.  He directed a 2009 movie titled "Inglorious Basterds".

'Inglorious Basterds" is based off of World War II.  Tarantino adds fictional characters and events.  I don't want to spoil the movie in case any of my readers have not yet seen it, but Tarantino does rewrite history.  If you don't have the patience to watch a movie that is about 3 hours long (although I suggest you do, it is a very good movie), then click here to read a quick synopsis of the film.  I personally was neither offended nor appalled at the rewriting of history.  It is very entertaining, and provides an ending that would have saved millions of lives were it true.  I know others, though, who disagree with Tarantino's choice to end the film the way he did.  I have one Jewish friend (who i am guessing would like to remain anonymous) who absolutely loved the movie.  His parents, on the other hand, were enraged by the alternate ending.  Should something controversial like this be avoided at all costs, or is this being blown out of proportion?