|Cast: Jamie Foxx, Christoph Waltz, Leonardo DiCaprio, Samuel L. Jackson, Kerry Washington, Don Johnson, Laura Cayouette, Walton Goggins|
Director(s): Quentin Tarantino
Easily my least favourite of Tarantino's work. There's good moments for sure, and tons of the usual bloodshed/witty dialogue that we expect from QT, but overall, this just left me with a bad taste in my mouth. Perhaps it's not what I expected when I heard QT was gonna tackle the spaghetti western genre, but setting it in the south, just before the civil war, with a huge slavery theme running through it, and waaaaay excessive use of the N-word (even for a slave-themed/blaxploitation western) caught me off-guard and just seemed wrong. Tarantino likes to prod and poke, so perhaps that's the reaction he was looking for, but it just wasn't a pleasant viewing experience for me. I don't even know why I was put-off - I'm used to coarse language and graphic violence, even in excess, and I love QT's catalogue on the whole - this just seemed to me like overkill for overkill's sake.
The film is peppered with lots of brief uncredited cameos, some by QT regulars like Zoe Bell, Michael Parks & Tom Savini, some by familiar faces like Jonah Hill, Bruce Dern & Robert Carradine, but it just becomes distracting after a while ("Look, it's Jonah Hill for no reason!) and QT himself has a VERY distracting cameo with a stupid Australian accent (and boy, did he get fat!) that could've been left on the cutting room floor for all intents and purposes. Sam Jackson plays, well, Sam Jackson, but older.
The better performances come from Waltz (love this guy), and both DiCaprio and Don Johnson as evil plantation/slave owners.
Thus far, the critics seem to be loving it, but I'm curious to hear more from the African-American community's take on it.
I guess people will say, "Well, that's how things were back then", and QT can use his artistic licence to do anything he wants I suppose (i.e. the whole fantastical take on WWII in Inglourious Basterds, where the dark humour worked much better), but perhaps mashing up slavery with spaghetti westerns and blaxploitation wasn't really necessary. Worth a rental, but I don't feel I ever need to see it again.
I gave it a watch this weekend and really enjoyed it. Maybe I was better prepared having read the above before hand but for me this was classic QT down to the soundtrack. He selects very specific actors and has a skill to write dialogue suited for them. DiCaprio was excellent as was Waltz and Jackson. Oddly enough, Django's character seemed the driest of the bunch. I agree about QT's cameo...wtf?? Really didn't need him in there. As for Jonah Hill, it really didn't bother me. He has a very small part and it wasn't a distraction. All in all it was worth my time and unlike Mitch, I would watch again.
I'll give you DiCaprio and Waltz, but Jackson was hammy and very cartoonish and silly, IMHO. And the dialogue? By QT's standards, there was nothing remarkable or worth remembering. And yes, Django himself lacked any special spark, a very mundane lead role. Where are the Geraldos? Where are the Eubankses?
I'm with Mitchy on this one, a big fat MEH!
I do not see what the fuss was all about. I found it rather dull and slow moving, and it just seemed to drag on and on and NEVER end...
For sure, Worst QT Movie EVER!!
|What's your rating of this movie?|