Tarantino western - Django Unchained

jonnyfingers

Finally watched this last night. I'm sorry to say I wasn't that impressed. Found myself quite bored and uninterested by the end. I love all of Tarantino's other films but this one just wasn't for me.

bogmanfan

Loved this, from start to finish. And if Waltz doesn't win the Oscar there is no justice

krudler

Listening to the soundtrack at the mo an this is by far my favourite piece of music in the film. That bit at 45secs is amazing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCx9ZIPiaFY

e_e

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-NVJog4vr4

This track gave me goosebumps second time seeing it.

Marty McFly

Just home from this now, have to say I loved it, especially Christoph Waltz and Leonardo Di Caprio with special mention to Samuel L Jackson and Don Johnson who was brilliant in his short cameo in providing some comic relief.


I did feel the film kinda died a bit once Di Caprio and Waltz were killed, Waltz brings such a charismatic charm to the screen you cant help but enjoy his performance along with Di Caprio wh was brilliant. Now I loved the few shootout scenes after there deaths but for some reason just couldn't warm to Jamie Foxx in the lead role you never once really root for him even though you should hes to cold lacking in passion for me to believe he truely loves her. One I would watch again certainly, but for me not as good as Inglorious Basterds the interactions and dialogue between the leads just wasn't to the same level, nor did feel the same levels of satisfaction seeing Di Caprio or Samuel L Jackson die as I did in the cinematic climax in Inglorious Basterds.

SpannerMonkey

Really really enjoyed this movie , have to say i really love christoph waltz , he made this movie and inglorious bastards , i thought the casting was brilliant and everyone really suited their role , A1

Busi_Girl08

Just back from it. Waltz and DiCaprio were stars in it, but I loved Foxx's calculated coolness. thought the movie felt about 40 minutes longer them out actually was though. Final act didn't flow that great.

The kkk hood scene felt like a Family Guy cutaway.

fisgon

I thought this was a riveting, complex, funny movie until about the last 30 minutes, when it went all Kill Bill. Tarantino just couldn't help himself.

I thought the way it dealt with slavery was much more interesting and deep than I would have expected from Quentin, he didn't shy away from any of the nastiness or brutality. And Samuel L. Jackson's character showed the complicity of some black people with the slave trade.

Another thing that is obvious from this film is the way Tarantino can handle these long, long scenes - like the first scene in Inlgorious Basterds - that can last up to 40 minutes, without panicking, taking his time, that build and build the tension. It's masterful, and, despite the blood soaked last half hour, the film is really something.

Evilsbane

Foxx was definitely lacking in charisma. I get what Tarantino was going for: Django is supposed to be the terse and taciturn spaghetti western hero like the Man With No Name, who is sort of a Grim Reaper character who collects on all outstanding karmic debts. However, terseness only work when an actor acts with his eyes; that's why spaghetti westerns make a habit of doing closeups of eyes during Mexican standoffs and the like. Terseness is supposed to give a sense of badassery, but it only really works when the characters AROUND the Grim Reaper character react in such a way as to convey this - at first startled, then they come to turns with the impending death this character represents via the stages of grief:

Denial: the character either doesn't realize or doesn't accept the threat the Grim Reaper poses. They may continue as they were, only for the Grim Reaper to cut them off mid-sentence.
Anger: the character only partially grasps the danger they're in and lashes out fitfully at the Grim Reaper character, either verbally or physically. They usually behave recklessly.
Bargaining: the character pleads for their life, still clinging to the possibility that things could turn around. In westerns, this is often the most satisfying when the character was previously full of themselves.
Depression: the character knows death is at hand; they grow fearfully silent, freeze in place, and grow wide-eyed (and in many modern westerns, piss themselves).
Acceptance: the character acknowledges but doesn't fear the possibility of death. The type of character who does this is usually another hardened gunslinger, often having stoically made their peace with it a long time ago. Another type of character who does this is the boo-hissable villain who's spent the whole movie desperately trying to cheat death through cunning but cowardly ploys, but when they are faced with the almost-certainty of death via a nigh-unwinnable situation they suddenly grow a pair get really calm (or even strangely excited) and turn and fight... for a non-western example, MacBeth. This usually makes for a great final showdown.

Some of Django's kills had denial, for example the mining company slavers, but their deaths were so sudden that there was no emotional connection; there was no progression through the stages. Steven's death had anger, but anger is only interesting if it progresses to another stage, especially Bargaining. In fact, I can't really think of even one of Django's kills that featured more than one stage of grief. Without the surrounding characters MAKING Django's interactions interesting, Django - forced by director preference to be like cold and immovable stone - can't make them interesting on his own.

Strangely, although most are complaining that Django Unchained was too long, I think it wasn't long enough; the last half-hour felt rushed and really should have been a Volume II.

Bazsutto

Looking to go see this before it leaves cinema. Only time that suites me is Lunchtime on Saturday in Dublin and the only place that seems to be showing it at that time is the Savoy.

Just wondering is this cinema any use these days?
Used to like this cinema, but haven't seen anything here in the last 10+ years.

Cheers

Barry

Paddy Cow

Was great up until

Schultz shot Candie. I was waiting for some sort of double cross by Candie. I don't buy that someone like that would let three people (two of them N-words) walk away after trying to con him. He was on a real psycho track with the skull and everything and then he turned into Mr Pleasant? The way it all happened was a massive let down.

Busi_Girl08

Paddy Cow wrote: »

Was great up until

Schultz shot Candie. I was waiting for some sort of double cross by Candie. I don't buy that someone like that would let three people (two of them N-words) walk away after trying to con him. He was on a real psycho track with the skull and everything and then he turned into Mr Pleasant? The way it all happened was a massive let down.

Who's to say that Candie was going to double cross him, but Schultz got there first, hence Schultz' reluctance.

Paddy Cow

Busi_Girl08 wrote: »

Who's to say that Candie was going to double cross him, but Schultz got there first, hence Schultz' reluctance.

I don't buy that Schultz didn't have the self control not to shake his hand. He had the gun up his sleeve and could've used that if Candie tried to double cross him. A professional like Schultz wouldn't have left himself open to being shot by yer man. This is the guy who shot someone in front of his kid and was well able to rationalise it.

Maybe I'll view it differently when I go back and rewatch it. Schultz did seem to find it a lot harder than Django to compartmentalise when it came to the slave trade. Just before they got to Candiland, Schultz pulled Django aside because he thought Django was going to blow the whole thing but it turned out it was Schultz who couldn't control himself in the end.

Actually, thinking about it a bit more, it might not be so surprising that Schultz was the one to crack. He had no problem being a bounty hunter because he had no problem killing criminals but he always hated the slave trade and had no real dealings with it. I'm confusing myself now lol. I need to watch it again.

Mellor

Paddy Cow wrote: »

Was great up until

Schultz shot Candie. I was waiting for some sort of double cross by Candie. I don't buy that someone like that would let three people (two of them N-words) walk away after trying to con him. He was on a real psycho track with the skull and everything and then he turned into Mr Pleasant? The way it all happened was a massive let down.

He didn't just let them walk away. He forced them to pay $12,000 for slave worth $300. He was a proud and horrible person, but ultimately he was a slave trader. As far as he was concern he was then "winner" in the whole affair.

Paddy Cow

Mellor wrote: »

He didn't just let them walk away. He forced them to pay $12,000 for slave worth $300. He was a proud and horrible person, but ultimately he was a slave trader. As far as he was concern he was then "winner" in the whole affair.

I would have expected him to keep the $12,000, kill the German and put the black couple back to work.

Baggy Trousers

Saw this movie on TV last night. Really enjoyed it. So well made. Little bit long but it's a classic.

Wedwood

When you see movies like this one, you realise why Tarantino is the best movie maker of the current era. The only weak spot funnily enough was his own cameo, otherwise terrific stuff.

Faith+1

Wedwood wrote: »

When you see movies like this one, you realise why Tarantino is the best movie maker of the current era. The only weak spot funnily enough was his own cameo, otherwise terrific stuff.

That guy has some noggin!