![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Django Unchained.
Oh look, another review from me! I should say upfront that I've long been a fan of Quentin Tarantino's work. Maybe not the man himself--he sorta strikes me as an obnoxious and self-absorbed man-child, but the guy is clearly a savant when it comes to absorbing film and synthesizing it into his own stuff. Reservoir Dogs was a revelation. Pulp Fiction remains one of the greatest things ever committed to celluloid, as far as I'm concerned. His work after those two was a little more hit-and-miss, and I hadn't seen either of his last two films, so I finally got to Django and am currently watching Inglourious Basterds.
So anyway, Django Unchained. As the title implies, the film revolves around Django (played with conviction by Jamie Foxx), a negro slave in the antebellum American South. He is sought out by Dr. King Schultz (Christoph Waltz), a German immigrant dentist-turned-bounty-hunter, who wants Django's help in identifying some fugitives he's pursuing. During the commission of the job, he becomes intrigued by Django and essentially takes him on as his apprentice, promising to help Django locate his lost wife--after an escape attempt, she and Django were recaptured, branded as runaways, and sold off separately. They track her to the Mississippi plantation of Calvin Candie (brilliantly and smarmily portrayed by Leonardo DiCaprio), where Dr. Schultz and Django pretend to be interested in the gladiatorial "sport" of mandingo, in which slaves are trained and forced to fight unarmed battles to the death for the amusement of their owners. Candie's elderly house-slave Stephen (in a nasty turn by Samuel L. Jackson) sees through the ruse, forcing Django into battle with Candie and his men.
This is essentially Tarantino's twist on the spaghetti Western of the 1960s, as also implied by the title (presumably after the Django films of 1966-72). That said, it is a splendidly-lensed piece of work, taking excellent advantage of the western and southern scenery--live oaks draped with Spanish moss abound, and the towns and plantations are atmospheric. The director of photography was Robert Richardson, who has worked on Tarantino's last few films as well as Martin Scorsese's stunningly-beautiful Hugo, so no surprise that it's a visually spectacular film.
It's also a very violent film, as one expects from Tarantino. There's a brutal mandingo fight, there's a slave torn apart by dogs, there's a torture scene or two, and of course there are gunfights galore, all filmed with no shortage of blood splashing and gushing here, there, and everywhere. Some of it is gratuitous, to be sure, but not as much as you'd get in the torture-porn horror film genre. And the story, punctuated as it is with brutality, is still a good one, and populated with a diverse and fascinating set of characters.
Conclusion: well worth the watch, especially if you're a Tarantino fan. It's a good ride of a film, with a good mix of pathos, humor, and the good old ultra-violence. I give it a 54 on my 64-point rating scale.
So anyway, Django Unchained. As the title implies, the film revolves around Django (played with conviction by Jamie Foxx), a negro slave in the antebellum American South. He is sought out by Dr. King Schultz (Christoph Waltz), a German immigrant dentist-turned-bounty-hunter, who wants Django's help in identifying some fugitives he's pursuing. During the commission of the job, he becomes intrigued by Django and essentially takes him on as his apprentice, promising to help Django locate his lost wife--after an escape attempt, she and Django were recaptured, branded as runaways, and sold off separately. They track her to the Mississippi plantation of Calvin Candie (brilliantly and smarmily portrayed by Leonardo DiCaprio), where Dr. Schultz and Django pretend to be interested in the gladiatorial "sport" of mandingo, in which slaves are trained and forced to fight unarmed battles to the death for the amusement of their owners. Candie's elderly house-slave Stephen (in a nasty turn by Samuel L. Jackson) sees through the ruse, forcing Django into battle with Candie and his men.
This is essentially Tarantino's twist on the spaghetti Western of the 1960s, as also implied by the title (presumably after the Django films of 1966-72). That said, it is a splendidly-lensed piece of work, taking excellent advantage of the western and southern scenery--live oaks draped with Spanish moss abound, and the towns and plantations are atmospheric. The director of photography was Robert Richardson, who has worked on Tarantino's last few films as well as Martin Scorsese's stunningly-beautiful Hugo, so no surprise that it's a visually spectacular film.
It's also a very violent film, as one expects from Tarantino. There's a brutal mandingo fight, there's a slave torn apart by dogs, there's a torture scene or two, and of course there are gunfights galore, all filmed with no shortage of blood splashing and gushing here, there, and everywhere. Some of it is gratuitous, to be sure, but not as much as you'd get in the torture-porn horror film genre. And the story, punctuated as it is with brutality, is still a good one, and populated with a diverse and fascinating set of characters.
Conclusion: well worth the watch, especially if you're a Tarantino fan. It's a good ride of a film, with a good mix of pathos, humor, and the good old ultra-violence. I give it a 54 on my 64-point rating scale.