Magospietato on 22/1/2013 at 00:10
So, Django.
I thought it was spectacular; a far better epic than the Hobbit (which I also enjoyed).
While the film suffered from the usual problems relating to QT's pastiche style, the film was both the funniest and most harrowing I've seen in some time.
That said, I found the last 20 minutes to be a little flat, though this is something I find in most films with a > 160 minute running time.
Oh, and Christoph Waltz deserves all the awards, as per usual.
bob_doe_nz on 22/1/2013 at 03:14
Is the intro about 20 mins and looks like it has nothing to do with the movie?
Melan on 22/1/2013 at 10:00
No, but it is about 20 minutes too long for the story it tells. Still one of Tarantino's better films. In Kill Bill and particularly Grindhouse, his style was starting to feel cheap and gimmicky, and it looked like that was all he had to say as a director. With Django, while the typical flaws are still here - QT's self-love, banter that ends up getting in the way of telling the story, going for cheap plot devices, and recycling films that weren't that good to begin with - they are a lot more restrained than in his recent work. Good performances, too - although the nominal lead could still only watch as diCaprio/Waltz/Jackson ran away with the show.
One point that sets Django apart from other Tarantino projects is that the usual psychopatic violence is clearly separated between "this is clean, harmless fun, do this at home, kids" and "this is actually gross and sick, don't do this". It doesn't make it pleasant, but it makes it more bearable as it doesn't shift over into torture porn as much as I feared. If there was a movie that could go horribly wrong, this was it, but in the end, it just didn't. It is a good deal less of an important statement than QT and his loyal pack of critics might think, but that doesn't make it not worth seeing. Solid, entertaining, leaves a pleasant minty aftertaste. Maybe a 6/10.
SubJeff on 22/1/2013 at 11:03
Almost none of your post makes any sense to me, in that I disagree with something in almost every sentence.
I'm likely seeing Django tonight so I'll post my thoughts afterwards.
SubJeff on 23/1/2013 at 00:03
Well it wasn't as fabulous I expected it to be, but I think it will do better on a second viewing as Inglorious Basterds did.
It was typically QT, violent and funny with a lot of chat (that I like actually), but the setting was rather unique in that I haven't ever seen anything that is so in your face about the dehumanisation of slavery. It was unreal actually. You know it went on but seeing this stuff was really tough at times, and I don't mean the in your face bits (and there are a few) but just the way so many of the slaves are so resigned to the fact.
DiCaprio was a little underwhelming - I wanted to dislike him more but he was just a man in a position for the most part. Foxx, Waltz and Jackson were top dollar though, as were most of the supporting cast. Waltz's character is an interesting juxtaposition to Hans Landa no doubt on purpose and Jackson is just Jackson in another era - he's almost the Mad Dog Jackson to "Biff " Jules.
Looked great, mostly shot nicely, but some of the zoom in close-ups didn't work as well as they should have.
Thumbs up from me.
Vivian on 23/1/2013 at 00:07
It's FUCKING WICKED. Dunno what else you need to know. I was extremely fucking entertained, and that does not happen very often. In fact, it has happened three times in the last three years or so. District 9, Dredd, and Django.
gunsmoke on 23/1/2013 at 10:24
Well, that sealed it. I am going Saturday.
catbarf on 27/1/2013 at 04:26
As a fan of old spaghetti Westerns I loved all the references Django Unchained has to its predecessors. Much of the music (except for a few jarring modern tracks) comes from older films, and the film is just chock-full of subtle and not-so-subtle references to its counterparts.
gunsmoke on 27/1/2013 at 05:57
Yeah, I just got back. I agree, I lost count of all the winks and nods to the classics in my favorite genre of TV/film. Surprisingly good movie too. It dragged on a little, though. Felt about 20 minutes too long.
catbarf on 27/1/2013 at 19:00
Quote Posted by gunsmoke
It dragged on a little, though. Felt about 20 minutes too long.
I agree with that. I expected the scene where he
convinces the guards to go back for a bounty using the wanted poster from his first kill to be the end, a 'back in the saddle' kind of ending, but instead he goes back to finish the job and get the girl. Shooting Jackson's character should be the peak of the film but instead it's an after-the-fact resolution well after the climax has passed.Otherwise, though, I really enjoyed it.
