The Twelfth Man.
Django Unchained isn’t just a glorification of gratuitous violence and foul language, EVERYthing about Django is gratuitous. There’s an extra character in it, like the crowd noise as the invisible twelfth man in a football game, only in this case, it’s the frequent and persistent voice of worried studio execs and concerned friends trying to reign Quentin in. If you listen closely, you can hear it throughout the film.
“Hey, so uh, Quentin… maybe seven blood packets instead of twelve in this scene? Also, I’m not sure you need that sorta ‘gurgle-slurp’ noise after the slaver gets his head caved in.. but I’m sure you know best, haha!”
“Quentin, buddy! Hey, I know this is about slavery and stuff, but what if we just said the N-word, like, ten fewer times? I think people get it, you know? I mean, just a thought.”
“Yo, Q-Ball. I’m loving this, buddy, I really am, but… this shot of the underside of Django’s hairy nutsack? What if we just shot it from, say, from a little further away? Maybe we try one your way and one my way? I dunno, just spitballin’ here.”
“Hey, T-Squared, I know you like putting yourself in your own movies and stuff, but… I dunno, does your character really need an Australian accent in this one? I’m worried it’s going to come off… silly. But hey, one man’s opinion.”
To see Django Unchained is to watch Quentin Tarantino studiously ignore that voice. You know Tarantino could easily make a refined movie that every asthmatic, private school-educated film critic would love, just by dialing back his peccadilloes half a tick. The beauty of Tarantino is that he doesn’t want to, and that he doesn’t. As brilliant an audience manipulator as he is, he’s still that video store clerk who can’t spell, who just loves sticking it to the shrivs and poindexters who’ll never fully appreciate something this rowdy. He’s like a comedian who constantly hears people tell him that he’s clever enough to be funny without swearing. “Yeah, but I like swearing. That’s what’s funny to me.”
Django Unchained is messy, overstuffed, and overlong, in a way that suits it just perfectly.
It’s like witnessing a manic episode. Tarantino is so obviously fired up about his subject matter, his nuttiness so palpable, that watching it you feel like you’re being covered in ink splatter like the blood-stained cotton in the trailer as Tarantino scribbles away.
Of all the little bells and whistles and references that Tarantino stole from seventies B-movies, the best trick he took is the way he razzle dazzles you with silly schlock and then subtly makes you care about the characters before you’ve even realized it. The Trojan Smut Horse of Actual Caring. Tarantino plays you like a bass string in Django. It’s like he knows exactly how far he can pull your willful suspension of disbelief – your willful acceptance of silly, over-the-top story elements because they’re so much fun, almost to the point that you’re laughing at the movie – before you snap back to actually feeling the gravity of a situation. And it’s the noise of that constant vibration between the two that creates the music. (BOOM, metaphor). It goes from screwball slapstick to a scene of a slave getting torn apart by dogs that makes you genuinely naseous about the institution of slavery, all without missing a beat. Yes, you will laugh at people saying the n-word, but I bet you’ll also be more viscerally disgusted than you would be watching Amistad or Glory (and yo, isn’t that the point?). Tarantino can transcend schlock because he understands how it works.
Come for the schlocky lead-ins to scenes of surprising emotional gravity, stay for Fritz the Bowing Horse.
That Christoph Waltz’ dentist-cum-bounty-hunter character has a horse named Fritz that bows and winneighs when introduced is only one of the many laugh-out-loud moments in what’s probably Tarantino’s funniest film. And it’s not just comedy for comedy’s sake, though I’d still respect it if it was. When we look back at history, we tend to put evil up on this pedestal in a way that unfairly flatters people like Adolf Hitler and the proverbial Jim Crow. We remember that they’re evil, but forget that most of them were f*cking clowns. The Third Reich was a farce – half the reason it even succeeded as much as it did was that people thought Hitler and his buddies were such inept jackasses that his government would collapse on its own if they just waited it out. In the same way, the Antebellum South was a backwards, funhouse-mirror imitation of European aristocracy, which was already unbelievably f*cking silly in its own right, as only men wearing powdered wigs and painting moles on their faces could be. To rip Tarantino for pulling evil down from its dignified pedestal is absolutely wrong-headed from a political perspective, and even more wronger from the perspective of entertainment (because, and try to follow my argument here… it’s f*cking funny). The entire scene of Jonah Hill and his proto-Klan buddies trying to decide whether to wear hoods for a terror attack is just magical. The longer it goes on, the funnier it gets.
I like to make fun of Samuel Jackson taking ANY MOVIE by saying that he’d show up to your cousin’s bat mitsvah if you paid him four figures, but his performance in Django Unchained reminds you why your cousin would want him there. (Shoshanna got taste, yo). His portrayal of Calvin Candie’s aging house slave, Stephen, is equal parts southern preacher (repeating the last word of DiCaprio’s sentences and adding “MMM-HMM, THAT’S RIGHT!”, which was apparently Jackson’s idea) and John Witherspoon in Friday, which he pulls off, all while exuding legitimate menace. It’s his best performance in years, easily.
There’s a logical point at which you think Django Unchained should end, and then the movie goes on for another 40 minutes.
At one point, Django the character encounters Quentin Tarantino the actor, playing a cowboy who’s Australian. Why is Quentin Australian? Why is he in the movie? His acting is TERRIBLE! You can barely even tell he’s supposed to be Australian! My God, it makes no sense! I love that about it. This movie is Tarantino’s sandbox.
As much as I love Inglourious Basterds, Inglourious was overstuffed with talk. Characters taking five sentences to say things when two would’ve sufficed, in much the same way people talk when they’ve been doing cocaine. Django Unchained is overstuffed with ideas. It’s messy and silly and funny and strange, in much the same way I imagine Quentin Tarantino’s mind. It might be his masterpiece.
GRADE: A+
Inglourious Badterds > Pulp Fiction > Kill Bill vol.2 > Reservoir Dogs > Kill Bill vol.1 > Django Unchained.
Heh, badterds
Ha, not quite bud
NO!
Pulp Fiction > Kill Bill > Jackie Brown > Reservoir Dogs > Death Proof > Inglorious Basterds
Still haven’t seen Django
Not a fan of Basterds.
Pulp Fiction > Reservoir Dogs > Kill Bill > Jackie Brown > Basterds > Death Proof
Have not seen Django yet.
Just walked in the door from seeing it in 35mm, and hey watch this:
Django> Pulp Fiction> Kill Bill(s)> Grindhouse (as it should be)> Basterds > J.B.
I don’t get why it’s so important for everyone to rank everything, sheesh
The Surley Badger > Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer > Crunch > W1ldcard > Juan_Carlo > xlarti
.
So relevant
is that haneke in the back?
Repent fool. That’s the COKE WIZARD.
At the beginning I was wondering if someone had told Quentin that the Civil War actually started in 1861, but then I figured he really didn’t give a shit
The story takes place prior to the fall of the south, on purpose. Not sure what you mean by referencing the Civil War.
At the beginning of the movie, the captions say “1858” … and then “Two years before the start of the Civil War”
I caught that, and immediately suspected that Q-Tip was trolling either people like me or people who are me.
The fact that you like this sooo much, has me worried. You hate everything.
If you guys just say this to annoy me, proceed, but if you actually believe it, you haven’t been fucking reading. In the last 13 movies I’ve reviewed, the only ones I graded lower than C were Flight and Here Comes the Boom. Two out of thirteen. Those are the facts.
Here Comes the Boom lower than a C?! Now you’ve lost my respect, too.
YOU DIDN’T LIKE HERE COMES THE BOOM!?!
Oh you son of a bitch.
Bam. Intercepted.
Correction: I hate everything. Vince is very much more loving.
And tender, Burnsy. And tender.
wtf u gave flight a c?
A D+, I believe, but I don’t feel like looking it up.
Whoa whoa whoa–we’re bringing “facts” to the comment section now? Well la di da, Facty von Veritas.
Compared to Tarantino’s other works I would characterize Django Unchained as solid but not spectacular. To me, it didn’t rise to the level of transcendence of Reservoir Dogs/Pulp Fiction/Kill Bill, in part because it felt too long and kind of gimmicky. That said, I was supremely entertained watching it, as it seems Tarantino was making it.
/for what it’s worth (i.e. nothing), would vote Looper as best movie of the year
I agree with everything inside parentheses.
miamidiesel: Oh I get it, it’s very clever.
lewisbojangles: Thank you.
miamidiesel: How’s that working out for you?
lewisbojangles: What?
miamidiesel: Being clever.
lewisbojangles: Great.
miamidiesel: Keep it up then… Right up.
/O AN U JUST GOT PWNED
This movie really did kick ass and Sam Jackson stole the show for me. I was surprised to realize he’s never won an Oscar even for Deep Blue Sea but that’s what happens when you appear in every god damn movie ever. ::Daniel Plainview voice:: Saturation, you boy!
Sam Jackson went straight Uncle Ruckus on this one….
Django is crazy good! Way better than Basterds.
I disagree! RABBLErabblerabblerabblerabble….
Your theory of Django being the cinematic representation of QTs mind doesn’t hold water due to the utter lack of foot porn.
SMITED.
^ agreed
In your previous article about Spike Lee, you touch upon the idea of art becoming terrible as artists look to push the boundary further and further. Here it sounds like Tarantino is pushing the boundary further than he has previously gone. Do you think QT has figured out how to walk that fine line, or do you worry with the kind of control he’s given (and his attitude of doing things the way he wants), he’s due to turn in a pile of shit movie?
Anyway, good review. Really looking forward to this movie.
In my last article, my point was that your art turns to shit if you spend all your time thinking about how dumb people are going to perceive it, instead of just laying it out as you think it is. I have nothing against boundary pushing. Will he eventually turn in a shit movie? Yeah, probably, but he does a great job walking the line here, I thought.
Ah, damn after-Christmas work day making my mind fill in points that weren’t actually being touched on! I’ve basically got old-timey cartoon farm animals playing instruments to the tune of “Turkey in the straw” in my head
Also, for anyone who’s familiar with the comic strip/cartoon show The Boondocks, I have no doubt that Samuel L. Jackson ripped off Uncle Ruckus for his performance, and did it really well.
I’m pretty sure Uncle Ruckus is modeled after the average house slave-yes man of the slavery days.
From the Uncle Ruckus wiki page:: Uncle Ruckus’s name is an amalgam of Uncle Tom and Amos Rucker, the latter being an African-American United Confederate Veterans member, who allegedly wanted to stay a slave after the Civil War. The name also bears a similarity to Uncle Remus.
So, you’re right… but Samuel L.’s performance will still remind you of Uncle Ruckus if you’ve ever seen The Boondocks.
At any case his resemblance to Ruckus could also be based off of the fact that he was a recurring character (Gin Rummy) on the show anyway ironically though as a privelged white youth wanting to be black!!
His performance in this film could very well be his best in a loooong ass time ad boy he embraced the role!! He was giving all the black folks in the theater I was in ancestral ptsd “This muthafucka here” was uttered plenty of times lol!!
Finally, I humbly look forward to more entries to come under the “Fritz the Bowing Horse” tag.
He might be this year’s Uggie the Dog.
In that case, Sarah Jessica Parker should probably skip all red carpets this year.
“FRITZ! FRITZ! WHO ARE YOU WEARING?! AND WHY IS MATHEW BRODERICK LEADING YOU?!”
Somewhere, Magic Mike’s dick helicopters into a building.
That’s the movie that Vince had previously dubbed the best of the year. Are we saying Django is better than Magic Mike now?
Cuz I saw MM only due to Vince’s review and I ended up loving it.
Never mind Sam Jackson, I want Christoph Waltz to come to my birthday party.
This movie was the perfect refuge from a Christmas party that was too many people unrelated to me in the same room as too little booze. I will always love it for that reason.
Tarantino is an overrated hack. His movies reek of cheap sensationalism for the sake of shock value, and his underlying messages are even less subtle. It’s like watching an ADHD-suffering 6 year old with a blood and swearing fetish making a movie about a dream he had after he ate too many packages of cocaine laced Chocodiles.
He is like the “bad boy alter ego” of Wes Anderson, and together, both of them make up the film embodiment of the ironically retro Williamsburg Hipster-set where they both look snarkily down their noses at everyone while dressing in incorrect period costume. Both trying WAY TOO FUCKING HARD to affect an oh so hip allure.
Can someone in Hollywood just make a goddamn movie that doesn’t immediately offend my film sensibilities with it’s “HEY EVERYBODY LOOK AT ME I’M BEING CRAZY!!!” Attention whoreishness?
Hopefully, they’ll both go out Buddy Holly style in a plane crash, and take tom Cruise with them.
Who would you say makes good movies then?
Please say Brett Ratner.
Wes Anderson travels only by dirigible and Tom Cruise base jumps to each destination, so I don’t even KNOW what you’re talking about.
Sam Mendes.
Alfred Hitchcock
Sam Peckinpah
David Mamet can be hit or miss but I like a lot of his stuff
Harold Ramis
Rob Reiner
Christopher Guest
Dude said Harold Ramis.
Sam Mendes replaces Tarantino’s grandiosity with shots of morose white people staring out windows.
ENNUI, MOTHERFUCKER, DO YOU HAVE IT?!?
Ramis directed the original National Lampoon’s Vacation, Caddyshack, and Groundhog Day. Crack on comedies all you want, but all three of those movies are infinitely more re-watchable than anything Tarantino has ever done.
If I want to watch poorly acted cartoons with racist overtones and gratuitous violence, I’ll dial up some 1940’s Looney Toons. Tarantino can keep his Mortal Kombat meets Steppin Fetchit routine to himself.
Harold Ramis’s recent output is enough to put him on my shit list. I saw Year One, and I have never been closer to walking out of a movie before. What a piece of shit.
PS: If one of your favorite directors still working hasn’t had a relevant or good movie since 1993, perhaps you should just stay away from more recent reviews.
And Chevy Chase was in Vacation and Fletch. But if I was to call Seth Rogen or Paul Rudd overrated, I wouldn’t cite the guy who made Nothing But Trouble as one of their superiors.
Pretty much every well regarded filmmaker has a small, short-lived window of exceptional creative output, followed by years of vary levels of middling to flat out terrible output.
See: Lucas, George; Speilberg, Stephen; Scott, Ridley.
Tarantino’s window of greatness closed somewhere between Jackie Brown and Kill Bill. But devoted fanboys and fans of overreaching trashy bullshit will defend him to death because they see their own personal window of youth and relevance closing and they have to go to denial mode.
In terms of music, if Pulp Fiction was Tarantino’s Master of Puppets, then Django is likely his Some Kind of Monster. The creativity wheels have come off the wagon completely, and this is the fall. All predictable shlock, nothing meaningful or engaging to be mined from the over indulgence.
Crack on comedies all you want, but all three of those movies are infinitely more re-watchable than anything Tarantino has ever done.
Uh… no. Comedies are mostly bullshit (stress mostly), unless you’re really fucking stupid and can’t entertain yourself. I laugh everyday. In fact, I crack myself up. So, I don’t need to pay money to hear a joke (sorry Vince).
But gladiatorial mandingo cage fights? Now that’s something you don’t see every day. And that’s a big reason why I go to the movies; for those “oh shit” moments; to experience things I’m probably not going to experience otherwise (stress probably).
And, let’s just say, I meet enough fucktards in my daily life, so I really don’t need to ever watch Chevy Chase do anything at all, let alone re-watch him do it again and again and again. Call me crazy, but I find barbarians to be infinitely more entertaining than douchebags.
Abnormal > Normal
Well if we’re going to compare supreme douchebags in the cast lists of Ramis vs. Tarantino movies…
Chevy Chase > John Travolta, Tarantino self casting as Jimmy, Michael Madsen, and Eric fucking Stolz.
Underball – you do realize that you have no point, are bashing for bashing’s sake, and most importantly, every single person that read any of your comments, really, truly, honestly, hopes you die… soon… and painfully.
I am serious. I wish you would just sit down in the street, pour gas over your head, and light a match.
It’s not your opinion that bothers me, but the way you express yourself that makes you universally hateable. You are the epitome of self-aggrandizing douchenozzle.
“Pretty much every well regarded filmmaker has a small, short-lived window of exceptional creative output, followed by years of vary levels of middling to flat out terrible output.”
Haneke, Tarkovsky, Kurosawa, Errol Morris or Kubrick much,
Mr Smartypants Featherweight?
To put Peckinpah on the same mantel as Mendes is to admit to washing down a hunk of rare filet mignon with a lukewarm Bud Light Lime. You have a taste for shit, now go read Cahiers du cinema upside-down on the subway.
Pancakes, You list is chock full of important, fantastic, wonderful filmmakers. I’m guessing you mihgt have missed the qualifer “Pretty Much” in my comment, but that’s fine.
Serious question: Do you you ACTUALLY put Tarantino in the Same category as Kubrick, Kurosawa, or Tarkovsky?
Really?
I mean, I’d be willing to put him in the same level as say, Scorcese, or Coppola, but Kurosawa, really?
I agree to a point. But I like Wes Anderson’s films.
michael bay, michael bay, baba booey, baba booey….
Saying that Kurosawa and Kubrick belong in a different category than Scorcese or Coppola or Tarantino is kind of like saying that your grand-mother is a better fucker than your sister just because one has years of practice on her belt, while the other has just started sucking cocks.
Anyone calling Django Unchained racist has surely not seen it.
Underball, I would be interested in what the last Tarantino movie you saw was, vs the last Ramis, and whether or not you thought the Ramis was a piece of shit.
You can’t classify someone as a good filmmaker while only citing a few (admittedly good) fils he made decades ago. I see no way to qualify Ramis as good considering anything from Groundhog Day on.
By my count Ramis made three great movies. By your count, Tarantino’s window closed after three or four. Seems about the same.
Will Tarantino not be great until he churns out a dozen crappers?
I am somewhat surprised you give Tarantino credit for refusing to dial back his style, when you dinged Wes Anderson for the same thing in Moonrise Kingdom. Matter of taste, I s’pose. Anyway, fantastic review.
Because with Tarantino, it felt like Tarantino making what Tarantino wanted to see, whereas in Moonrise Kingdom (which I still mostly enjoyed), it felt a little like Wes Anderson trying fulfill other people’s notions of Wes Anderson. Moonrise Kingdom felt like Wes Anderson playing a part, Django feels more organic to me. Though James Cameron is totally true to himself, and though I respect him for that, his true self is a big ol’ cheeseball, which is why I don’t like his movies as much.
Anderson is Tarantino’s bisexual beta-male doppelganger. One of these days, Quentin is going to make a smugly sardonic movie about family dynamics and the pain of being so awkward it hurts, and Wes is going to throw together a hybrid Blaxploitation/Ninja movie set during the Great Depression starring Bradley Cooper, Winona Ryder, the Other Guy from Wham! and Samuel L. Jackson, and they will be no less retarded.
I’d watch that Blaxploitation Ninja movie.
I get the sense Underball doesn’t like Tarantino or Anderson. I’m not sure what tipped me off.
Vince, I disagree on MK. I think it was Wes finally saying fuck it, I’m turning it up to 11.
Perhaps I’m blinded by my hatred for watching pre-pubescent romance. Because I seriously hate that shit. I still say it desperately needed a hell-raiser character. It seemed incredibly mannered for something supposedly turned up to 11.
In QT’s movies, it’s the N-words you DON’T hear that make it so good.
+1. COTW, if THAT’S still a thing.
Why do you keep switching between past and present tense? God damn it, Vince.
i hope the coke wizard has a cameo as a slave owner named ‘Seamus McSnorty’
Quentin Tarantino is like the Pearl Jam of Moviemakers. Never really was anywhere near as good as his rabid fanbase claims, is very much full of himself for all the wrong reasons especially given his requisite talent level, and has throngs of steakhead, MMA-watching, American Idol voting, Dum-Dum, Sports bar haunting, tribal tattoo sporting, bandwagon fans who will defend him tooth and nail.
Wait, weren’t you complaining about hipsters loving him? And now you’re complaining about Joe-Schmo loving him? Boy, he’s appealing to a lot of people’s sensibilities, huh?
you smell your own farts don’t you
@underball
So the same people who enjoyed Inglorious Basterds and it’s almost 3 hour run time with multiple scenes that are subtitled are the same people who watch American Idol?
/cool story bro
Also, Filmdrunk is not the place to talk shit about MMA. Vince will sub you with his sweet wop-jitsu.
He’s appealing to a very specific generation’s indentity-lacking pop culture regurgitation set. Hipsters like him because he’s edgy, like wearing an ill-fitting terrycloth blouse at a Job interview. Steakheads like him because he’s quasi-racist and gratuitously violent like a combination Rambo and George Zimmerman.
All of these people have the collective taste of a short bus class trip to the zoo.
Good taste = making fun of the mentally disabled?
oh yea, you definitely do
“Hunter S. Thompson is an overrated hack as a sports writer. For my money it doesn’t get any better than Rick Reilly.” – Underball
Hyperbole much, Underball?
Not that I’m surprised at the preposterous trolling.
DeFrank, think about the content and tone of Tarantino’s movies.
Now ask yourself if my opinions are really that hyperbolic, or simply in keeping with the mood as it’s already been set.
wut.
Underball, I’m confused. Did you even see Django? You’ve done a lot of generalizing on Tarantino’s “style” (and made some pretty silly Bill Simmons-esque analogies in the process) but haven’t said anything whatsoever about the substance of the movie Vince is reviewing here.
I guess I just don’t get your point outside of trolling Tarantino fans. I’m a fan of Pulp Fiction, Death Proof, Inglorious Bastards, his part of Four Rooms, and Kill Bill 1 (I’ll wait to actually see Django before judging it), but not Jackie Brown or Kill Bill 2 so much. Does that make me a poser hipster wannabe Phish fan or an American-Idol-watching MMA fan?
To put it in a way you might better understand: Some people likes, some don’ts. IS OK.
Also, Farthammer is win. I like.
Hipsters and bros, as defined by underball, are the exact people that don’t watch movies in theaters, especially on Christmas. The entire audience when I saw Django was middle aged or older.
Underball sounds like an art school dropout with a grudge. Some hipster must have run over his cat on a fixit.
Ironic that there is actual underball in the movie.
Although I liked this movie a lot there’s still something I didn’t care for too much that I can’t quite put my finger on….or in
You’re always left wondering frame by frame by frame by frame what obscure Cambodian-Japanese-Western-Porn film from the 60’s he’s referring to. You know, the one 4 people at USC’s film school have even heard of.
Samuel L Jackson was funny but if anyone who has ever watched an episode of “Boondocks” could easily see that character was such a ridiculous rip off of Uncle Ruckus. I’m not going to lie I was a little irked by it because Uncle Ruckus dialogue and insults are far funnier than Samuel was.
Common source material, not ripoff. To put it in ape terms, orangs did not “rip off” gorillas’ nest-building activities- they both picked it up from hominidae ancestors.
Also, what is a rapier ape? Rapier than what? Is there an ape baseline for rape that we are to use for comparison?
Was Leo good in this?
Yes. Everyone was great. Although, Waltz>Jackson>Leo>Foxx.
Also curious about this – isn’t this the first time he’s played a pure villain role?
Interesting break down of the actors. I agree with Foxx being at the bottom of the list, he seemed to be playing the “straight man” role while everyone else was chewing up the scenery. Waltz is just so damn likeable.
@Hrtn4Sqrtn. You forgot Leo>Hill>Don Johnson>Fox
i thought everyone brought their A-game and delivered. seems weird to rank their performances. i do think not enough people are talking about Leo’s performance though, i think Waltz and Samuel Jackson have overshadowed him a bit in reviews and discussion
I thought they all did solid work. But yeah, if you’re expecting to get noticed, don’t do a movie where Christoph Waltz and Samuel Jackson are chewing scenery.
@Duchess Agree 100%.
And my ranking might have been too arbitrary. Even Foxx was more the serviceable, it’s just that Waltz, Jackson and Leo are amazing in every scene they are in. While Foxx turns in a Matt Ryan (qb) type performance. Good…but not memorable. Also just saw this on yahoo…minor spoilers but damn that’s insane.
[movies.yahoo.com]
All actors did a great job in this. Very well done. I also like how james Remar played 2 parts. Bets tarantino movie since Pulp Fiction IMO.
I wanted to see this yesterday, but I got dragged to Les Mis instead.
Worst. Christmas. Ever.
Patty, if you need a friend to talk to…I….I understand…
Good write up Vince. I definitely think this is one of Tarantino’s better movies of the past few years. Supremely entertaining and definitely better than Basterds (which I liked). Just one thing I want to mention because I’ve already seen two people comment on it:
Samuel L. Jackson DID NOT rip off Uncle Rukus (Boondocks Character). Jackson’s character represents the “Self-hating slave” that really existed on plantations. They were so devoted to their masters and mentally scarred by slavery they sacrificed all semblance of identity or self respect and sometimes treated other slaves just as bad as the slave masters. Uncle Ruckus represented this archetype to an extent too but Jackson’s performance was more true to life. To keep implying that he ripped off the cartoon is to be ignorant of the historical aspect of a real phenomenon.
I really feeling like adding a “Duh” but I’ll be a mature commenter and judge all who thought that silently.
Yeeaaaah because Uncle Ruckus wasn’t derived from the same exact description. Aaron McGruder has stated this many times. That whole scene in front of the House was damn near the same setting when Uncle Ruckus noticed the “Freeman” family at the Wunslers dinner party. So please chill with the high and mighty explanation Spike Lee.
Hahaha, that Spike Lee crack is hilarious to me (even though it doesn’t really make sense) but you still sound stupid to think that Sam Jackson based his performance of a self hating house slave on a Boondocks character. I mentioned that Ruckus represented this archetype too (reading is fundamental, guy) but Jackson didn’t rip off anybody. And the same setting? You mean in a slaveploitation movie there was a “Big House” on a plantation? Wow, Tarantino ripped that off from McGruder too! Idiot.
Hope this reply comes off equally high and moderately mighty.
“I am a smart and powerful man , cuz I call people with different views idiots on a film blog’s message board.”
I think everyone gets that both Boondock’s Uncle Ruckus/ Django’s Stephen are derived from the “self-hating slave” archtype, I think the criticism is that Stephen’s character is just too similar to Uncle Ruckus in his mannerisms and dialogue. They’re pretty much the same exact character
Idiots! You’re all idiots!
Oy, are you truly that butthurt? Forgive me. And I didn’t call him an idiot b/c our views are different. Re-read my comments. That is all.
No butthurt here, just stating the facts Ma’am
@TheReader I was going to respond about said topic but really the issue is that you are not capable of expressing yourself properly. You could have given an easy objection and it could be simple agree to disagree. But your only form of opinion is to use SAT words and be flat out condescending comes of very pompous. We both know that Samuel works on the Boondocks and an actor of his skill could have portrayed that same person differently but he chose to use the same kind character as one he is familiar with. Could it have been a nod to “Boondocks”? Possibly.
This movie is an action comedy. Not a Nat Turner bio-pic. So spare me. It’s loosely based on the truth like. Its a bloodier Blazing Saddles.
I mean I get it. You want to show Vince, Josh, Ufford and the other Uproxx bloggers you can be just as witty as them. Cheers! Admittedly you are a good writer. When you respond next time try actually encourage a good discussion than come off like a complete snatch.
@RapierApe *face palm* I was going to reply using actual SAT words but then decided against it b/c you really, really seemed bothered that an anonymous commenter made you feel bad. A simple “fuck off” could have been used to reply to my “condescending” and “pompous” comment instead you won’t let up about how I’m such a meanie jerk. Yeesh. And I’m hardly better b/c I keep entertaining it w/ increasingly meanie jerk responses. I wasn’t trying to encourage discussion. I stated my piece like you did yours. If I knew it would result in such hurt butts I may have thought a little harder before I posted. I only go on TSS and FilmDrunk (and only comment intermittently) so besides the creator of this site, I don’t know who those other bloggers are. Ease up on the sensitivity dear.
@whiteyj Nah. . .you’re butthurt.
I like Tarantino. He seems to only make movies that he (and quite possibly only he) would be interested in seeing, but then is such a master of his craft that he pulls out a product that end up being very popular and successful. He’s like the only successful and likeable version of every art fuck film kid I went to college with.
I also love his enthusiasm. He fucking LOVES movies, watches everything, would wrap himself up in 35mm stock every night if he could. Every film of his is more a celebration of the medium itself than a singular movie.
I’ll be checking this out tomorrow. I can’t wait.
Oh, FINE, The Mighty Feklahr will go see it. Probably. Fuckin’ Vince and his good movie reviews…
And don’t worry, He ain’t gonna say no crazy shit about the Hobbit > Django. Klingons are crazy and nerdy, not totally bereft of rational perspective and utterly retarted.
Back when it was just rumored that Tarantino was thinking about filming Django in New Orleans, I walked into my neighborhood coffee shop one day and there he was at the counter, wearing a jacket with “Pussy Wagon” embroidered on the back as he ordered a latte. I knew it would be a masterpiece right then and there.
This movie panders to everyone who I am not.
Not that I want to underball anyone. Though that sounds like fun.
Then you and underball should go somewhere and spend the day fingering eachother’s buttholes, describing the sensations, texture, and flavor of one another’s shit ad naseum.
Someone needs to look up the word “pander”. Or perhaps actually see a movie once in a while before making ignorant assessments of one.
See Vince’s comment on crowd-pleasery below.
It’s just not something I need at the theater these days, nothing to escape, life is pleasing enough. Merry Christmas and a happy New Year!
yo vince, any plans on reviewing rick alverson’s “the comedy”? would love to hear your thoughts.
Filmdrunk really jas grown! Once upon a time we all just read reviews then commented silly one-liners and insult Vince in the process! Now there’s smartypants discussions and reverence for Vinnie’s writing!!
Hahaha, no shit! WTF happened
This was a bad year for movies. I know because I’m heading into 2013 calling the best of this year the movies that entertained me most. Every single movie I enjoyed was too long, and Django was not an exception.
Django was great, everything you expect from Tarantino. However, it was flawed, and was more of a comedy than a western. I didn’t love it, but I felt the same way after seeing Inglorious Basterds, and now Basterds is one of my favorite movies.
DiCapprio killed it, and Waltz, Jackson and Foxx all were very good in their roles. The story itself wasn’t Tarantino’s best, but it could be that I’m used to things being chopped up and put back together in the wrong order.
It was actually a great year for movies, as is every year. Saying that is like saying it was a bad year for TV. It wasn’t, you’re just watching the wrong stuff.
Slowly back away from the multiplex …
I love Quentin Tarantino almost as much as I hate his fans.
He is like the Jerry Garcia of movie making
He is like the Steven Seagal of Filmdrunk baiting.
I’ve become more and more biased against Tarantino movies. People told me I had to watch Pulp Fiction cause it was the greatest thing ever, and once I did, I felt it was very meh. And ever since then, I’ve watched as Tarantino movie after Tarantino movie has driven people into a feverish zeal. It’s like being Cillian Murphy in Twenty Eight Days later. “WHY ARE THESE PEOPLE FREAKING OUT OVER THIS!” type stuff. I can’t help but feel like Quentin’s the Brett Favre of movie directors. He made some entertaining stuff, nothing too spectacular. But people started shitting themselves over his movies, and now he’ll just fucking go deep because I’M TARANTINO DAMMIT! Sometimes it hits, most of the time it just ends up fucked.
Anyways, I’m sure this movie is a lot like his other ones: some great poignant or funny scenes, but a lot of schlocky ones. I know they’re SUPPOSED to be schlocky; but just because something’s supposed to be shit, doesn’t mean it’s not still shit.
Exactly. It’s not that I don’t find his movies fairly entertaining. They are, in a big, cheeseball kind of way. It’s when people start talking about awarding him for these movies, or claiming its’ the best movie of year. STOP IT. It’s gross and loud and in your face cornball histrionics, but it’s NOT great filmmaking.
Quentin Tarantino : Gratuitious Blood and Offensive language
as:
Michael Bay : Explosions and slo-mo circular sweeping camera angles.
Sounds like both of you are actually against fans and critics, not the films. Too bad you couldn’t articulate that earlier.
Next time try seeing the films you want to see and don’t bother with reviews and comments thereof.
I hit 60 films seen this year with Django and I didn’t read one review without having seen the movie first. Everything is much more enjoyable that way.
Don’t take this as an admission that I base my opinions around what everyone else does or doesn’t like. This is my personal feelings on his movies, helped along because people never stop telling me how much I must like his movies. I don’t care about them, at all. And everyone insisting that I should doesn’t make me want to start caring either.
As per my commenting on something I haven’t seen, you, good sir, are clearly new to the internet.
I loved this movie. So much. An African-American lady sat next to me in the theatre. So naturally, I was cautious with how I reacted the entire time. But once yelled, “OHHHHHH, SHIT JUST GOT REAL” then I laxed up a bit. When she laughed outloud, I laughed outloud. When she didn’t laugh, I still laughed outloud, BUT I followed it up with a head shake. Just in case. That’s what we call WHITE GUILT. Funny thing is, I’m not even white.
once *she* yelled. And it was a yell.
I mostly agree with you Vince, but I think the last 40 minutes of the movie were discursive enough to keep it from becoming a classic. My problems with the last 40 started when Waltz shot Leo. Two problems — 1) why did he snap then? and 2) why did he put his arms up and basically serve himself up to the guy with the shotgun? The whole sequence honestly made it seem like he was almost committing suicide.
I don’t have too big of a problem with Waltz’s character dying in and of itself, and would be fine with it as the catalyst for the huge shootout the movie was clearly building up to. However, nothing that happened after the shootout added anything to the movie. I get that Tarantino needed to show the nutsack and the dynamite and try his South African accent, but all of those things could have been used in the story at a point that made narrative sense. And, the fact that those 40 minutes took the movie from being a little over 2 hours to a little under 3 hours made them grating where they otherwise might have just been diverting.
That being said, I actually had literally this same reaction:
“It goes from screwball slapstick to a scene of a slave getting torn apart by dogs that makes you genuinely naseous about the institution of slavery, all without missing a beat.”
QT didn’t miss a beat mostly because right after that he panned out and DROPPED the beat with that ill Ro$$ track that played as the camera panned over their marching column.
I thought SLJ was great, and I laughed a lot at his character, but I couldn’t shake the feeling that he’d hate that I was laughing at it, sort of like the story about Chappell losing it after watching his white camera guy laugh at one of his routines.
Overall great flick though.
Bad form to include spoilers at this point, but …
Waltz snapped at that moment because Leo was petulant dick and ha had had enough. He wasn’t going to dignify him with a handshake because as far as Waltz was concerned there was no need to be dignified to a slave owner. He was above it. He probably had the sense that he was going to be killed whether or not he shook his hand. Not sure he had another bullet for the shotgun guy, but in any case he didn’t want to force Django into a gun battle at that point, so he literally took the bullet so Django would have a fighting chance to finish his quest. The only thing missing was Waltz saying “Woth it!”
I agree with the last forty minutes. I would have liked Waltz to live even THIRTY more seconds… I understand why he HAD to shoot Leo at that point but would have liked bit more… something. I understand that QT wanted the whole “keep the bill from your first bounty with you always, it’s useful” to come to fruition but could that have been used in a different way? Did he HAVE to leave the plantation before coming back to kick ass?
ALSO: WTF is up with the female “poacher”? All those close ups and eye shots and then, literally, boom: she’s dead.
“My favorite thing about Django Unchained was the inordinate amount of cocaine QT did during the entire affair.” – Coke Wizard
Well, it has been confirmed. When Vince likes it I do not. Why am I not surprised that he thought this was a good film.
Man, honestly, I don’t know how you could not like this movie, or what you could’ve been expecting going in that it didn’t deliver.
Sometimes I get it, I won’t try to convince people why they should like Magic Mike or The Master, but Django seemed like pure crowd-pleasery.
This movie is good to watch. Critics have described the film as bold and original, but some reviews criticized the film for being ultra-violent but it is all happening in action movies. Since this movie is about good versus evil, not race so one should not make it a point of discussion.watch at..
[www.wewatchmoviesfree.net]
Or just go to a theatre and not get raped by computer viruses and MPAA lawsuits.
Anyone getting computer viruses or caught by the MPAA while downloading movies in 2012/2013 is a complete moron.
Too L; Didn’t R
No one else expected Foxx to pop his head around a door and say “Where all the white women”…preferably before or without the shot of his balls…
I knew that the Spaghetti westerns would return in a new form, and Mr. Tarantino has made a bold attempt to revive one of the best styles ever produced. The movie was great with the music filling the vacuum of speechless scenes. The end song reminded me of the great Mario Girotti (Terence Hill) in his role as “Trinity.” The next Blaghetti Western should be titled “Requiem for a Negro.” Keep it up Mr. Tarantino
Saw the premiere on Christmas Day. So every other black person I’ve talked to that’s seen the movie has said at least two of the following:
1) This movie was incredible.
2) Fuck Mitt Romney.
3) Spike Lee can eat a dick.
Could it be possible that Tarantino made a movie not intended for the average white person to enjoy? No, I know, that would be ridiculous. Let’s go watch Les Mis.
The refrain I kept hearing in talking with the giddily ecstatic African-American audience at the bar in the main area was:
“I couldn’t have dreamt of a better movie.”
I think that more than anything speaks to how successful the movie was. Of course, these were rural Texas working-class black people I was speaking to and not New York film élites, so their opinion doesn’t really count for shit; does it?
“I have black friends”
“I am black”
I went into this movie with high expectations from all the buzz surrounding it. I must say it was fantasmatic. I loved it. I laughed and enjoyed so much of it and I really thought it was going to be more violent or graphic. Really wasnt as bad as everyone is making it out to be. I thought the use of the N-word felt natural. The gun fights were fun and explosively gory, as expected. From what everyone was saying I really did think the dog scene was going to be way worse.
The thing I liked a lot was the use of flashbacks. Not your ordinary type of flashbacks, usually unexpected by the viewer and either completely jarring or beautiful.
Flashbacks actually seemed more like subconscious visions mostly. Still thought they were excellent.
Also to add, the relationship between Django and the slave who hates hims and he later frees I thought was very important to the Hero story of Django. He is like a pure superhero during that sequence of scenes and you see the man who looked at him prior with pure hate, jealousy and disdain actually admire Django as he rode off like badass.
Tarantino’s accent wasn’t Australian. It was Sewth Effrikan, hence the use of ” bleck ” and the mining connection. The guy who looked like Robert Forster on the other hand, he had a fine Aussie accent.
I could swear he used the word “abbo” (Australia’s version of the n-word).
Contrary to the bulk of what I’d heard/read – if the movie would’ve ended at its “logical” conclusion – I would’ve left with a “well, it was pretty good, I guess” feeling. It wasn’t until those last 40+ minutes that I thought the film finally steered itself toward the razor-sharp cinematic indulgence I’d been waiting patiently for.
Probably my least favorite QT movie overall, but I still enjoyed the hell out of it.
Also, Austin audiences cheered both times our city was mentioned by Waltz. So there was that.
At the time, the movie not ending seemed annoying, but after finishing it and enjoying that last part I was so happy it was there.
Can someone talk to me about the use of Stephen’s fake infirmity? Was it an act just for guests or for everyone in the house EXCEPT Leo? When he was sitting in that chair drinking there was a definite moment of “Oh shit what is this guy’s real role here?” Maybe I’m answering my own question but jeeze louise that was a good “WHA?” moment…. That and the girl poacher who got a bunch of close ups but no lines… “Wait… all that build up and then this… what?
Yeah, the girl poacher thing was weird. I get the sense there was more to that story arc that got cut, but I could be wrong.
Maybe it was the fact that she was a woman but was covering it up(physically with a bandana), only really noticed her gender on several obvious close-ups. If I remember correctly I think she was gazing at Django, as if she drew parallels between being a Female Single Independent Poacher type and him being a Black Free Bounty Hunter or if that is for the audience to put together. Like she had a little moment of realization that things are changing, not much, but there are signs of progress.
I think all that is is that QT likes working with Zoe Bell.
I loved the film. I wish they would have given the female poacher a backstory. She had a presence about her. I felt the last 40 minutes was weird but necessary.
True story: Two bro saying d-bags wearing affliction t-shirts giggled like school girls when they showed Django’s shaft. Losers.