Author Topic: Django Unchained  (Read 62801 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

squints

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2238
  • Respect: +75
Re: Django Unchained
« Reply #405 on: January 25, 2013, 01:13:58 PM »
+11

EDIT: A few points about squints's comment. First, I still don't understand the "how is this any different from anything he's ever done?" comments as reasons for not liking a movie. If I like chocolate, why would I expect to eat a chocolate hoping it tastes like pizza and be disappointed to find out it tastes like a chocolate. I like Django Unchained because it feels like a Tarantino movie. The stories and themes are way different from other movies of his, the setting is different, so are the actors, but it is Tarantino and that's enough for me.

Look at PTA's filmography, i'll admit Magnolia and Boogie Nights have a similar vibe going on as far as style, but going from Punch Drunk to There Will Be Blood and we're dealing with films that absolutely feel different from each other.

Substitute slaves owners with nazis and slaves with jews and we have ourselves Djanglorious Basterds.
I'm not gonna let Tarantino slide just because he's Tarantino and that's what he's expected to make. I loved Kill Bill and i loved Jackie Brown and those two are so different from each other. Kill Bill is the pinnacle of his career from the last 10 years and he went "safe" with Inglorious and Django, there is nothing new about those two, nothing refreshing, nothing to keep me interested. I go to a Michael Bay movie to see a Michael Bay move, knowing exactly what to expect. I've gone to Tarantino's movies for the last decade expecting greatness from one of the most interesting and original filmmakers working today and I've been let down. This man is a golden child with relatively infinite resources at his disposal, a privilege virtually no other filmmaker in the world has and this is what he gives us?  So now I'm just supposed to be satisfied with his homogenization?

My initial problems with Tarantino all started with the end of Basterds, Motherfucker actually wrote down in his fucking screenplay "I think this may be my masterpiece." Seriously?! The nerve of this dude! And no quentin, that was NOT your masterpiece, Django is NOT your masterpiece. And with all these comments about not being an old boring filmmaker make it seem like he isn't even trying anymore. Like he's satisfied with what he's done to this point and he's deathly afraid of making a shitty old man movie.


I've definitely realized I've been pooping on everyone's party lately (here and irl) about this film and i really should just let it go but (along with The Dark Knight Rises and Prometheus) the hype i'd built for myself for this and other movies this last year was absolutely unobtainable. There's no way they could have lived up to my expectations. I just wanted more
“The myth by no means finds its adequate objectification in the spoken word. The structure of the scenes and the visible imagery reveal a deeper wisdom than the poet himself is able to put into words and concepts” – Friedrich Nietzsche

modage

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10781
  • Respect: +721
    • Floating Heads
Re: Django Unchained
« Reply #406 on: January 25, 2013, 01:27:05 PM »
0
Thumbs up to that post.
Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.

matt35mm

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 3239
  • Bony old behind.
  • Respect: +490
    • My Films on Vimeo
Re: Django Unchained
« Reply #407 on: January 25, 2013, 01:44:54 PM »
0
Now I'm wondering why P liked this but hated INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS. They just don't seem that different, except that IB feels tighter and DU feels looser.

ElPandaRoyal

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1716
  • Respect: +105
Re: Django Unchained
« Reply #408 on: January 26, 2013, 04:53:20 AM »
+1
It seems it all comes down to what you think the experience offers you in the end. For me, Django Unchained was different enough from Inglourious Basterds to validate its existence. Yes, there are similarities, which in some cases make it all the more interesting. I think that by having a german actor who previously played a hateful Nazi now appearing as a slave savior QT is making a big balls statement comparing slavery no the Holocaust, slave owners to Nazis. With his last two movies, he's been trying to make us look at History from a different perspective and I love that. You don't, there's nothing more I can say about it. I don't give him a pass because he is Tarantino, I give it because his movie was a riot. Whenever he makes one I don't appreciate, I'll be the first to admit it, just like after I loved every Nolan movie to that point, and when The Dark Knight came out I had no problem admitting it was shit.
Si

jenkins

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2354
  • Respect: +1430
    • Neon Burrito
Re: Django Unchained
« Reply #409 on: January 26, 2013, 01:20:56 PM »
0
what about the cinematic grammar? is the cinematic grammar much different between ib and du?

i think the cinematic grammar is much different between ib and du. by accident this is a kind of huge topic -- i'd be interested in reading a long piece that talks about the development of qt's cinematic grammar in a way that isolates it from the grammar he buckets from the well, what seems to be a personal voice and what seems to be a community voice, and how those interact, etc.

i don't think the same moviemaker who made reservoir dogs made du, no way. that's obvious. but i also have suspicions that there are meaningful disparities between ib and du. in an overall sense they're two movies about historical revenge fantasies. but smaller patterns exist.
Every perspective is an act of creation.

wilder

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3618
  • Respect: +1707
Re: Django Unchained
« Reply #410 on: January 26, 2013, 03:27:05 PM »
0
what about the cinematic grammar? is the cinematic grammar much different between ib and du?

i think the cinematic grammar is much different between ib and du. by accident this is a kind of huge topic -- i'd be interested in reading a long piece that talks about the development of qt's cinematic grammar in a way that isolates it from the grammar he buckets from the well, what seems to be a personal voice and what seems to be a community voice, and how those interact, etc.

i don't think the same moviemaker who made reservoir dogs made du, no way. that's obvious. but i also have suspicions that there are meaningful disparities between ib and du. in an overall sense they're two movies about historical revenge fantasies. but smaller patterns exist.

Do it start the thread.

jenkins

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2354
  • Respect: +1430
    • Neon Burrito
Re: Django Unchained
« Reply #411 on: January 26, 2013, 05:38:30 PM »
0
thread, more like life project. i'd at least need to be able to screencap. so i'll keep it under my hat and maybe let's do it after home release.
Every perspective is an act of creation.

Jeremy Blackman

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10936
  • Respect: +1342
Re: Django Unchained
« Reply #412 on: January 26, 2013, 07:39:31 PM »
0
Inglorious has show-stopping setpieces. Several strands of plot. Overall a very mixed-up approach. Django is slavishly focused on one plot, and intensely linear.
"Hunger is the purest sin"

ElPandaRoyal

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1716
  • Respect: +105
Re: Django Unchained
« Reply #413 on: February 01, 2013, 04:14:48 AM »
0
I just remembered something I felt while watching this. Just a curiosity, really.

Near the end of the movie, when Django comes back to rescue Broomhilda, there's a shot from inside the room she's in where we can see him slowly riding his horse outside. Did anyone else think of There Will Be Blood for a second, considering how the shot is framed and whatnot?
Si

Drenk

  • The Return Threshold
  • ****
  • Posts: 869
  • Respect: +498
Re: Django Unchained
« Reply #414 on: February 01, 2013, 06:45:43 AM »
0
Yes, I thought of There Will Be Blood (that shot scared me the first time I saw TWBB), and I think Tarantino thinks of PTA.
I'm so many people.

Frederico Fellini

  • The Vision Quest
  • **
  • Posts: 296
  • Respect: +172
Re: Django Unchained
« Reply #415 on: February 01, 2013, 09:06:41 AM »
+1
I just remembered something I felt while watching this. Just a curiosity, really.

Near the end of the movie, when Django comes back to rescue Broomhilda, there's a shot from inside the room she's in where we can see him slowly riding his horse outside. Did anyone else think of There Will Be Blood for a second, considering how the shot is framed and whatnot?


Yes!... It's just like the shot when Daniel goes to talk to Bandy and the grandson tells him that Bandy's not there. There were other moments that reminded me of TWBB too. Like when Django is walking through the field and Bacalov's "La corsa (2nd version)"  plays.  QT said that TWBB inspired him to take it to the next level with "Basterds", I think their friendship also plays a role into it.
We fought against the day and we won... WE WON.

Cinema is something you do for a billion years... or not at all.

squints

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2238
  • Respect: +75
Re: Django Unchained
« Reply #416 on: February 01, 2013, 01:48:25 PM »
0
QT said that TWBB inspired him to take it to the next level with "Basterds"

PSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAW  :yabbse-undecided:
“The myth by no means finds its adequate objectification in the spoken word. The structure of the scenes and the visible imagery reveal a deeper wisdom than the poet himself is able to put into words and concepts” – Friedrich Nietzsche

Alexandro

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1742
  • Respect: +470
Re: Django Unchained
« Reply #417 on: February 03, 2013, 01:11:06 AM »
0
To me this film was an experience akin to Kill Bill 2, because it suffers from the same problem: it just goes on and on and end ups becoming tiring.

Beyond the any criticism one may have on the "ideas" Tarantino may be juggling with here, the film has some great moments that only a filmmaker like him could achieve. However, those moments are almost diluted because it's all so overwritten.

SPOILERS

The first hour or so was where I mainly found the problems. Scenes are so much longer than needed, dialogues over explain and repeat everything, sequences seem to appear capriciously and jokes tend to not be that funny. There is A LOT of stuff in this part of the movie that could just go and it all would be better. Dr Schultz is an extremely talky character, and every time he started with one of his long clever monologues I kept thinking how much more interesting it would be if he were silent and only spoke so much when it was necessary, keeping in with the film's subject of playing a character to survive. Did he really HAD to explain Django his line of work in that bar, drinking a beer, while waiting on a sheriff? Was the Broomhilda story really necessary? The Klan scene?

Thankfully, once they enter the Mandingo fighting part of the story it all feels vital and on point. Even in the microcosmos of Candyland, the whole slavery operation is shown at it's most cruel and stupid, and DiCaprio really injects a lot of energy to this film with his performance. The bit when he talks about nigger love literally cracked me up just by looking at his mannerisms and faces. I don't think he's ever been this loose in anything, or this funny. Also, Sam Jackson has the sad and disturbing role of the piece. All the elements fit together so well here, and up to the point where they cut the deal and buy Broomhilda. Even Waltz manages to find a core to his character and gives probably the best emotional reward of the film. Tellingly, he speaks very little at this moment.

Obviously for everyone else in the world but Tarantino, the film should end with a shoot out right after hell breaks loose in this sequence. But no. Not Tarantino. He has to keep talking and talking through his characters for almost 25 more minutes, and with a terrible cameo in a sequence that truly makes no sense being there whatsoever. And he needs his hero well groomed for the climax. It's all very dumb, and all the joy that I felt for the previous hour was threatened because of this, one of the worst sins of cinema: having a climax, then going back to whatever, and having a second climax...This is the same problem that Kill Bill 2 had. I will contextualize this to my own experience: i love Kill bill 1, i believe is one of those perfect films. It just flows from one sequence to the next so effortlessly, and ends with an awesome classic cliffhanger. But Kill Bill 2, over the years I have tried several times to enjoy it, and it just doesn't do it for me. I admire it, but I get bored by it. It keeps going forever, with characters talking and having long conversations and then ends up in what I'm pretty confident in calling it an anti climax. Those last 25 minutes here are just superflous. I just can't come up with any good enough reason for their existence.

That said, when the film works, it works very well. Tarantino is wise to make the last confrontation between the two main black characters, and early on he has the fantastic moment when Django whips the guy who whipped Broomhilda before. That is the kind of stuff the movie should have been about, because after that Django's process is pretty muddled, and usually feels like secondary to whatever Schultz is doing.

Overall, it's an ambitious popcorn film with great moments, many awesome performances and is enjoyable, but it's too long and not that fun, so it's not the masterpiece I was expecting. It's linear and that should make it a light affair, and I miss the Tarantino of Kill Bill 1, who could just string together one spectacular action sequence after another.

We can compare this to IB but I don't see it. That one is a much more complex, fun and surprising film. This one is a little too indulgent. I've seen it twice and I don't know if I would see it again. Nevertheless, is not some bore fest as I've read, is pretty ballsy, and I would recommend it...


modage

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10781
  • Respect: +721
    • Floating Heads
Re: Django Unchained
« Reply #418 on: February 03, 2013, 07:36:35 AM »
0
Well said.
Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.

ElPandaRoyal

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1716
  • Respect: +105
Re: Django Unchained
« Reply #419 on: February 03, 2013, 09:35:38 AM »
0
Yes, I definitely agree with the final 25 minutes being too much. I wrote a few posts ago why I think Tarantino chose to not end the movie at the shootout, but I still don't think it's effective.

However, the first hour I think was spot on. I loved the pace, dialog, humor and overall acting. I think the Broomhilda story worked quite well, and the Klan was a touch of genius, the whole bit about them not being able to see through those masks was not only funny but a great metaphor for racism.
Si

 

DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy