And so we come to the final review for Django
Month! I literally just got back from watching this last night and I've
got to say I really enjoyed it. I've never been a die hard worshiper
of Quentin Tarantino but I do like his work. I appreciate that there's
very few 'auteur' directors like him who are still going and considering how
dumbed down and generic films are getting nowadays it's nice to know
there's still some directors who have the power and influence to experiment with the medium of
film. I must confess I actually haven't got around to watching his last
movie - Inglourious Basterds
- yet but plan to catch up with that this weekend. I think the reason I
skipped that one at the cinema was due to my disappointment with Death Proof
- one half of the Grindhouse
double feature - that was
released on its own in the UK. I felt that movie was very self
indulgent and quite frankly a bit of a waste of his talents. I was
beginning to question whether or not Tarantino had become a parody of
himself. Happily, I can report that
this film is a far superior flick than Death Proof.
Django Unchained
is set two years prior to the American Civil War when slavery was still
rife in the American Deep South. The film basically revolves around two
men. The first is Dr King Schultz, an eccentric German dentist turned bounty hunter.
The second is Django, a black slave who is rescued by Schultz
(initially just to identify a couple of wanted criminals). Immediately
after meeting Django, Schultz takes a shine to him and the two start
working as bounty hunting partners and, wouldn't you know it, they make a
pretty good team. Before long Django mentions that he has a wife who is
still held in captivity so the two
decide to combine their efforts and track down where she is. Their
search leads them to Calvin Candie (played by Leonardo DiCaprio), a sadistic but foppish slave owner
with a passion for getting his slaves to wrestle to the death. Django
and Schultz pretend to be interested in purchasing a wrestler in order
to gain access to Candie's plantation. But how long will their ruse
last? And will they find Django's wife?
You know it's always been
quite hard to review Tarantino films because he's very much a
rule-breaker in cinematic terms. His films are often exciting because he
gives them such left-field plots and they have such quick shifts in
tone. You never quite know where they are going and Tarantino clearly
enjoys doing this. He delights in subverting audiences' expectations.
That's why his films are always, on the surface at least, genre films
because with genre films you know roughly how they should look and feel. Django Unchained
is a western but it goes in many places that westerns have never gone -
not least by tackling the subject of slavery. I thought, considering
the taboo nature of the subject matter, Tarantino had good handle on how
to treat it. The film is very irreverent and often quite humorous but,
at the same time, the brutality of slavery is treated with enormous
candor. I think it's good to point out that Tarantino isn't referencing
actual real life events - there's no known records of the type of
wrestling that appears in this film - but what he is doing is using it
as a sort of metaphor for the appalling treatment African Americans did
experience during the times of slavery. I thought it was a novel idea;
wrapping a serious subject matter in a pulp-y story in order to bring it
more mainstream attention.
Django Unchained also follows the traditional pattern of Spaghetti westerns by being a revenge story - but it is also
a comedy, a buddy movie, an action film and a drama. This eclectic
'scattershot' approach means that there always something new just around
the corner to enjoy if this film ever gets stale. For me the highlight
was definitely Christopher Waltz, whose portrayal of the kindly Dr
Schultz was note perfect. I just loved the little character traits; his
delightfully mannered way of speaking, the little brush of his moustache
every time he had to think, and just the warmth he shows Django's
character (which never feels patronising or cheesy). I also loved how he
was, for the most part, religiously devoted to the law. When Django
asks for his help to rescue his wife they don't go in all guns blazing,
Schultz insists on rescuing her in a (semi-)legal manner. I also really
enjoyed the performance of Don Johnson as Big Daddy, another Southern
plantation owner who Django and Schultz run into early on. Dressed like
Colonel Sanders, Johnson really makes the most of his scenes. Who knew
Sonny Crockett was so good at comedy?* The part where Big Daddy and his
fellow racist friends have an big argument about whether or not they
should wear their KKK masks was the funniest scene I've seen in years.
Jamie Foxx isn't an actor I've seen in a lot of films but he makes a
very good fit for the character of Django. I'm glad Tarantino dropped
the idea of using Will Smith in the role (not least because I think we
all would have got flashbacks to Wild Wild West if that had happened). Strangely, although Foxx's Django is the
title character of the film, for the most of the running time he takes
kind of a backseat role, allowing the more eccentric characters of Waltz
and DiCaprio to take centre stage. It's really only in the last quarter
of the film that he emerges as the main protagonist. I quite liked this
technique because it mirrors that way that Django grows in confidence
throughout the film. Although Django is physically unchained in the first scene he doesn't get spiritually
unchained until the end of the film. Similarly, Samuel L Jackson's
character Stephen (Candie's head butler) at first seems like an
insignificant supporting role but by the end it's more or less made out
that he is the major villain of
the film rather than DiCaprio. I think what Tarantino is trying to say
is that the racism as two enemies. The white people who perpetrate it
and the black people who perpetuate it by going along with it. Stephen
is a fascinating character and I liked the duality he creates in
Candie's character. Candie is a man who enjoys watching black people
wrestle to the death but at the same time he enjoys the company of
Stephen and allows him the freedom to speak openly and honestly.
I did have some issues with the film though. I don't think it's a flawless masterpiece in the same way that Pulp Fiction
was. I found the second half of the film a little jarring in its scale
and tempo. And I thought Tarantino should have ratcheted up the tension even more
than he did when Django and Schultz reach Candie's house. Similarly, although
DiCaprio was very good as Candie but I felt the character wasn't as
memorable as it could have been. A lot of actors excel at spouting
Tarantino's dialogue but DiCaprio felt a bit stiff at times (maybe I'm
being too harsh). A few other minor points that I was disappointed with
included Zoe Bell as a masked tracker who gets a lot of lingering
close-ups but then we never see anything more from her character (I'm
guessing it was a subplot that got cut). I also felt Walton Goggins was
severely underused as Billy Crash. Anyone who has watched The Shield or Justified
will know how great an actor he can be but he's kind of lost here and
doesn't get anything memorable to do or say. I did hear that Goggins
character was an amalgamation of two characters, created after Kurt
Russell and Kevin Costner dropped out. I think in this case Tarantino's
hasty rewriting is probably the reason Billy Crash feels like a
half-finished character. My biggest issue was that we see so little of
Django's wife Broomhilda. I know it's a western, and westerns don't
usually have roles for women but I really felt Broomhilda should have
had more lines or more of a story. Kerry Washington does a fine job in
the role but ultimately when Django rides off with her at the end she
feels more like a trophy than the love of his life.
All in all Django Unchained is a
great film. Not perfect but well worth seeing and way above most stuff
at the cinema. I guess should probably touch on how this fits in with
the other Django "rip-offs".
Well, for the most part it stands quite separate. The two major
references that everyone are going to spot are the Luis Bacalov's song
from the 1966 movie that Tarantino places over his opening credits and
the appearance (or should I say "Friendly Participation") of Franco Nero
in a cameo role. Nero doesn't get many lines but the exchange between
him and Django is a great nod. (Nero: "What's your name?" Foxx:"Django"
Nero:"Can you spell it?" Foxx:"D.J.A.N.G.O. The D is silent." Nero:"I
know"). There's also a few little touches. The first town Schultz and
Django arrive in is swimming in mud just like in Corbucci's original.
And, maybe I'm clutching at straws, but the master and apprentice angle
to Schultz teaching Django how to be a bounty hunter felt a bit similar
to Django The Last Killer.
Anyway, I'm going to be interested as to what Tarantino tries to tackle
next. He's done crime, kung fu, exploitation horror, war and a western
but where the hell do you go next?
GRADE: A-
* Did anyone else think when they saw Don Johnson and Jamie Foxx on screen that it was (Old) Crockett and (New) Tubbs?
I too noticed how useless the Zoe Bell character is, and it also felt like her character was left in the cutting room floor, those close ups of her seem to point at something more....but then it goes nowhere.
ReplyDeleteHadn't noticed that Miami Vice connection! Ha, good observation!
Amazing how many genres Django Unchained covers, what genre should Tarantino do next? I wonder if he'd do a sci-fi? But I doubt it, he doesnt seem the Sci-Fi type, but who the hell knows. More than likely, it will be another gangster film....but honestly, I wish he'd have something totally original. Apperently there's another Kill Bill in the cards...
Yeah, sci-fi would be really interesting but I don't know whether the Weinsteins' would bankroll it.
ReplyDeleteI too think it would be good to see him go out of his comfort zone. He showed a lot of progress with this film.
He's mentioned Kill Bill 3 a few times. I think the last I heard he wasn't interested in making it anymore.
Great Miami Vice catch!
ReplyDeleteAnd by the way, Old Crockett and New Tubbs sounds like an awesome name for a band.
Thanks Mitch. I've got some friends who are looking for a band name. I'll give them you're suggestion and let you know if they take it up.
ReplyDeleteWow, this review was amazing! Seriously! A really fantastic read. I really dug this one quite a bit. And I do consider myself a die hard Tarantino fan. Maybe ran on a bit too long for my taste, but for the most part I hardly noticed.
ReplyDeleteI had read an article with Zoe Bell where she said basically there was a side story involving her character, but because of time they never got around to shooting those scenes. What a shame.
Ya know, I "hated" Death Proof with a passion the first time I saw it. I just didn't enjoy it and pretty much felt the same way you do. Buuuuuut, one day I decided to give it anther shot and holy shit, I love it. Not all of it, but I love a lot about it. My biggest issue, or two rather, are 1.) that annoying bitch DJ character. I was so happy when she died.
2.) the endless scenes of women talking about nothing. That drove me nuts. I had no interest in seeing how Tarantino assumed women think and talk and those scenes were so painful to sit through.
But I love Russell's character. I love the stunts and I loved the feel of the film overall. Don't judge me!
I've also discussed quite often my desire to see him tackle Sci-fi. He's done almost everything else, I would love to see that genre with his particular spin on it.
Yeah, I think Tarantino is becoming more and more guilty of not getting to the point. I appreciate he wants to let the story breathe and cram in all his homages and in-jokes but it could have quite easily be 2 hours and wouldn't have been a lesser film.
ReplyDeleteI can quite believe that they didn't get around to shooting Zoe Bell's scenes. The shoot went way over schedule and loads of actors kept dropping out.
Yeah, I probably will give Death Proof another go at some point. I'd quite like to see the shorter cut and see if that's improves it somewhat. I actually quite dug the first half of the film but the second half (I can't stand Rosario Dawson) was a mess. I got what he was trying to do changing the film stock/lighting etc. You got the feeling it was a real grindhouse movie where maybe a director got fired halfway through.