Reviews Comments: I don't know what to make of this movie (Spoilers)
I don't know what to make of this movie (Spoilers)
Django Unchained is unique film, tossing (like all Tarantino movies) gore, action, comedy and drama into a blender, becoming a surreal mix. But, I'm still unsure what to make of this movie. Let's get to the pros, Django Unchained has some truly fantastic characters (Dr.King Schultz, in special), a mind-blowing soundtrack ("His Name is King..."), good cinematography, brillant gunfights, and some extremely funny moments (NO, NOBODY BROUGHT AN EXTRA BAG!). It's a clever, amusing, hilarious and even sometimes heartwarming action movie. However, as Wackd's review noticed, the plot is somewhat shallow as you go along the ride, for instance, the entire Brittle Brothers/Proto KKK thing seriously serves no purpose in the movie. Granted, it did introduce a piece of Django's backstory, but it still comes as bizarre how the film's first forty minutes have no connection to the plot of the rest. I'd just merge The Brittle Brothers' plot with Candie's (say the Proto KKK just dragged runaway slaves to Candie to increase his stock of Mandingos and done, a more workable plot). Another problem: Django is fantastically overshadowed by the rest of the cast. He is an amusing character with some depth, but Schultz is one of the most amusing gunfighters in western history, Leonardo Di Caprio redefines the meaning of the term "Chewing The Scenery", And Samuel L. Jackson is a freaking riot ("JESUS GIVE ME THE STRENGTH TO KILL THIS NIGGER."), Django was the character I LEAST enjoyed watching out of these four. It does not help that A) The movie focuses a lot more on Django B) Schultz is murdered mid-way through, and for me the movie somewhat fell apart without his charisma or fatherly relationship with Django. I also felt it was a death completely, absurdly, absolutely unnecessary. Summing up, I felt like if the movie followed the more "straight action movie route" (i.e Schultz and Django team up against Candie, they save Hilda, kill Candie. They Ride away to live more adventures. Roll credits. Stephen doesn't interrupt the plot abruptly and the movie follows swiftly), I'd have liked it a lot more. One of the rare cases where predictability would have helped. Still, to quote Candie, "It's quite a bit of fun". 7/10, maybe eight. SEE REVIEW'S TITLE.
Hey, thanks for the plug, man. I agree with a lot of what you said and you touched on some stuff I didn't even consider. You also, evidently, think much more highly of the movie than I do, which is fine, if a bit amusing.
comment #17860 Wackd 27th Jan 13
You're welcome, bro. See, I also agree with most of what you said, but I think the main point of diversion between you and me (and why I think much more highly of the movie than you do) is that I enjoyed the villains a freaking lot (while you thought they were generic), so I wasn't as annoyed with the characterization as you were. I frankly could watch a whole movie just about Stephen and Candie.
comment #17877 Gaon 27th Jan 13
Oh, no, I thought they were enjoyable, if only because the performances and jokes elevated them. The personalities, yes, were bland as shit, but that didn't keep them from being fun to watch.
comment #17905 Wackd 30th Jan 13
I think it worked. The thing is, as with Clint Eastwood, the cocksure, stoic, badass protagonist isn't much of a character in and of themselves. They are usually teamed up with a loud mouthed, funny, eccentric character (see Eli Wallach's "Tuco") for the sake of providing an involving figure with an emotional arc. Waltz did steal the limelight the whole time, as did Wallach, but I think Foxx played his part perfectly. As for shallow plots - the plot is far less important in these things than the force of the characters. I didn't feel the plot needed to be any stronger, what with the whole range of colourful, cartoon performances on display.
comment #18193 maninahat 13th Feb 13
In order to post comments, you need to