Movie News

Leonardo DiCaprio to be Calvin Candie in Tarantino's DJANGO UNCHAINED?

Published at: June 7, 2011, 11:37 p.m. CST

Hey folks, Harry here - and the trades are reporting that Leonardo DiCaprio is in talks to play the rather awesome character of Calvin Candie.   I find that fascinating because reading the character made me think of this rather awesomely despicable Calvin as an older man.  I know Leo isn't the kid from TITANIC anymore, but I thought of Calvin as being someone in their late 50's or 60's.   Funny how one's imagination can take you.   I really can't wait to see how the rest of this plays out - because this is the best script that Tarantino has written to date I feel.   Absolutely love DJANGO UNCHAINED.   

Don't expect any of the rumors to necessarily be true.   Remember, Warren Beatty was going to be Bill for a real long time before Tarantino honed in on David Carradine.   

Readers Talkback

comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • June 7, 2011, 11:38 p.m. CST

    Post 0 muthafuckers

    by Laserbrain

  • June 7, 2011, 11:38 p.m. CST

    Tuekey ballz!

    by nico_laos

  • June 7, 2011, 11:39 p.m. CST

    Script review, Harry?

    by Laserbrain

    Don't hold out on us now.

  • June 7, 2011, 11:39 p.m. CST

    Seriously? Didn't this story break last week?

    by Angry Mike

  • June 7, 2011, 11:46 p.m. CST

    Love me some Tarantino news.

    by Yelsaeb

    It just makes the day.

  • June 7, 2011, 11:48 p.m. CST

    PLEASE make this happen

    by pleasebanme

    Leo has NEVER played a villain (but he'd be amazing at it), he seems to make a point to work with the best filmmakers in modern cinema (Scorsese, Allen, Scott, Nolan, Cameron, Boyle, Spielberg), I will be PISSED if this turns out to be nothing more than a rumor. Leo's got the very "deliberate" acting style that can perfectly suit Tarantino's extremely deliberate writing style. This better be true.

  • June 7, 2011, 11:49 p.m. CST

    The Kid from The Quick and the Dead grown up as Candie.

    by Doctor_Strangepork

  • June 7, 2011, 11:52 p.m. CST

    LEO as a villain would be a solid choice in this film

    by Mennen

  • June 7, 2011, 11:54 p.m. CST

    hey Tarintino: Please do something different with Leo...

    by Citizin_insane

    Di Caprio has gone from being type-casted as a kid wise beyond his years (titanic, basketball diaries, the aviator, catch me if you can, et al), to being type-casted as a tortured man on a mission (inception, shutter island, revolution road). The only good news is no one can reinvent an actors persona like QT. So this IS good news :)

  • June 7, 2011, 11:54 p.m. CST

    I've read the script...I don't see it

    by Billy_D_Williams

    QT's casting choices are getting weirder and weirder...Calvin Candie is a southern, flamboyant, womanizing, but charming scumbag...it begs to be played by a character actor, not some movie star who generally turns in sub par performances. QT is getting obsessed with movie stars and is losing his focus. Brad Pitt in Inglorious wasn't horrible, but it wasn't memorable either, and it seems to have started some strange trend in QT's films.

  • June 7, 2011, 11:54 p.m. CST

    Who is Calvin Candie meant to be anyway?

    by Citizin_insane

  • June 7, 2011, 11:55 p.m. CST

    will Quentin make a cameo?

    by seabiscuits

  • June 7, 2011, 11:56 p.m. CST

    Fuck yes!

    by hiperaktiv

    Leo is simply an awesome actor. The days of hating the teenage heart throb from Titanic are over. He would make for a great villain.

  • June 8, 2011, 12:01 a.m. CST

    you're too quick billy d

    by Citizin_insane

  • June 8, 2011, 12:07 a.m. CST

    Brad Pitt wasn't memorable in Basterds??

    by Stifler's Mom

    Ahhh, for my money, he was fucking awesome. QT's casting choices are almost universally note-perfect.

  • June 8, 2011, 12:17 a.m. CST

    I'd imagined Candie, as older as well

    by Happyfat73

    But, thinking about it, if Leo can really turn up the charisma on this, then he could do a pretty good job.</p> </p> It's funny... I read the first half of the script when Will Smith was pegged as Django. Then, when I was half way through, Idris Elba moved to the front running as Django. In my mind, Will Smith would be a better Django that Elba.</p> </p> Also.... Brad Pitt was great in IB.

  • June 8, 2011, 12:20 a.m. CST

    I'm with you stifler's mom.

    by kermit_the_fraud

    I loooooved Pitt in BASTERDS. Bone-jor-noh. I been chewed out before.

  • June 8, 2011, 12:32 a.m. CST

    Dicaprio is grreat!

    by Sanyi

    The kid knows his stuff, say what you will about him but he's a damn good actor. And yes, Brad Pitt was fuckin' awesome in the Basterds! I loved his accent and the line delivery.

  • He has always worked (or obsessed, as you put it) with actors who are or were big movie stars at some point. Harvey keitel might be the exception, but was big enough a name to get Reviour Dogs made. Bruce Willis in Pulp Fiction. Robert De Niro in Jackie Brown. Daryl Hannah in Kill Bill. Kurt Russell in Death Proof and as you point out, Brad Pitt in Inglourious Basterds. Leonardo DiCaprio in Django Unchained, doesn't seem out of place in the slightest.

  • June 8, 2011, 12:55 a.m. CST

    Sorry...

    by SebastianHaff

    But I've never been able to dig DiCaprio. Everyone always says we need to forget Titanic and watch how serious he is now, but I think he's the motherfucker that needs to forget Titanic. Every single goddamn movie he's done since 1997 it seems like he's fucking screaming "I AM NOT THE KID FROM TITANIC ANYMORE!! AAAAARRRGGGHHH!!! SEEEEEEEERIOUS ACTOOOOOORR!!" <br><p> Guy needs to fuck off with that shit. When it stops feeling like he's trying so hard, the kid's definitely got some talent. But seriously, quit with the pubic hair goatee. Looks like a teenage Burger King drive-through attendee. And stop with the fucking tough guy roles. I realize he's buff in real life and could definitely kick my ass. But he just isn't a badass on screen. Does not feel natural. Come on, Tom Hanks could probably kick my ass, but it would have been bullshit for him to have the lead in Blood Diamond, too. DiCaprio rarely chooses movies appropriate to his look and voice, and frankly he isn't versatile enough to fake it like Gary Oldman does. <br><p> So yeah. Unless Tarantino's written the character to be a whiny sounding 35 year old boy with a teenager's pubic hair goatee, my oh so very important opinion is to keep DiCaprio the fuck away from this flick. <br><P> That is all.

  • June 8, 2011, 12:59 a.m. CST

    2 M@THERFUCKING cool....

    by KHjLL

    Best news of the day... 12 hour work day... 6 hours online homework... hopefully 1-2 hours of writing b4 I got to get 2 sleep to get up at 6... I can't fucking wait.... TARANTINO WESTERN... thought I'd never see the day been waiting since NATURAL BORN KILLERS... It's cool that DICAPRIO and TARANTINO get to work togther since INGLORIOUS BESTERDS didn't work out...

  • June 8, 2011, 1:24 a.m. CST

    Never understood the people that still dislike DiCaprio

    by Sardonic

    They always come off as trying to seem cool or something, like how 16 year old boys acted when Titanic came out.

  • June 8, 2011, 2:06 a.m. CST

    Tarantino Western = Mucho Mexican standoffs

    by Chuck_Chuckwalla

    You know it to be true.

  • June 8, 2011, 2:13 a.m. CST

    one month old story...

    by TopHat

    ...combined with the utter bullshit of NOT reviewing the movie script. Harry actually snuck into movie screenings dressed as a woman and saw an early rough cut of THE PHANTOM MENEACE in a hotel room. Now, he can't even review a Tarantino script. The Catwoman "photo" The Superman "photo" Stories breaking WEEKS after everyone else. Seriously, what's the point of this site anymore? Answer: TALKBACKERS WE are the only reason why this site is still up. Which makes the writers of this site's obivous condescension of us even more pathetic; Notice how they're ending their articles now?: "Thoughts?", "What do you guys think?", etc. Its as if they're the mature parents asking the opinions of children, knowing they'll either belittle or ignore them anyway. How about doing script reviews again? How about writing NEGATIVE reviews without kissing the ass of the film makers, trying to save face? "Classic TV Clip of the week"? "Nordling remembers _____"? "Set pic of the day"?

  • June 8, 2011, 2:13 a.m. CST

    You're wrong, pleasebanme...

    by Prydie

    ...Leo played a villain in The Man in the Iron Mask.

  • Seriously - this movie's going to be incredible. And I'm pretty sure, from the character and dialogue, that he's casting Christoph Waltz as Dr. King Schultz, the bounty hunter. The script that's leaked is his FINAL draft, from April - and it's written so well that reading it is like watching the film. What a treat. Damn.

  • June 8, 2011, 3:32 a.m. CST

    Wasn't Leo originally considered for Waltz's role in Basterds?

    by Bass Ackwards

    I thought I read QT had him in mind but then decided to go with an actual German. Guess I'm just pointing out that QT has an itch to cast Leo as a villain, and I can envision Leo in this role more than I can as Hans Landa (but that may simply be due to how wholly Waltz owns that role).

  • He's not mean-lookin' enough for Calvin. James Woods is yer man.

  • June 8, 2011, 3:49 a.m. CST

    Will Smith for Django...

    by Righteous Brother

    according to Empire magazine.

  • June 8, 2011, 3:59 a.m. CST

    Workshed, James Woods is a PERFECT choice!!!!

    by dasheight

  • June 8, 2011, 5:25 a.m. CST

    According to my calculations...

    by John

    ...Tarantino's next shitfest will be either a shemale revenge flick or a gay man revenge flick. We've had Jews (Inglorious Basterds), Teenage Women (Deathproof), 30-something Woman (Kill Bill) and Black Middleaged Woman (Jackie Brown). The obnoxious, manic fuck is just cynically ticking off different demographics, so now we get Black Male Slaves.

  • June 8, 2011, 5:28 a.m. CST

    Leo + Quentin

    by Denty420

    = promising.

  • June 8, 2011, 6:34 a.m. CST

    Just what we need.

    by XxSoulFlyxX

    Another one of his movies where the dialogue goes on and and on and on and on and then there is some kind of foot fetish scene.

  • June 8, 2011, 7:02 a.m. CST

    Remember when everyone hated Leo?

    by alxorange

    That was stupid. The guy has been solid since This Boys Life. He's one of the best actors out there right now. I hope this happens.

  • June 8, 2011, 7:09 a.m. CST

    I'm not big on Leo D's acting style

    by Spandau Belly

    He never ruins a movie for me, in fact, I've enjoyed a lot of his movies, but he always feels like he's trying too hard. I can always feel him acting and he's never 'fun' to watch. Somebody earlier mentioned James Woods. I always support the casting of James Woods and it would make up for how Woods missed out on being in Resevoir Dogs cuz his agent turned down the part without consulting him.

  • June 8, 2011, 7:14 a.m. CST

    Powers Booth was my thought.

    by paper

    I also thought the character was older.

  • June 8, 2011, 7:14 a.m. CST

    Love both these guys...but totally not in a gay way.

    by Tikidonkeypunch

  • June 8, 2011, 7:14 a.m. CST

    Re: Basterds

    by batfunk

    I loved Basterds mainly because Pitt was hardly in it. Anyone could have played his part. Christophe Waltz was the REAL star! He should be great in Django Unchained.

  • June 8, 2011, 7:48 a.m. CST

    Leo hate is completely unfounded these days.

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    Only grouchy contrarians with nothing better to do are the ones who complain.

  • June 8, 2011, 8:08 a.m. CST

    Woody Harrelson should've been Aldo Raine

    by Spandau Belly

    I get that Tarantino needed a big name to sell the movie, and Pitt was amusing, but he did feel like a good actor playing a hick, whereas Harrelson actually feels like a real hick who can act.

  • June 8, 2011, 8:26 a.m. CST

    OLD news.

    by knowthyself

    Old news guys.

  • June 8, 2011, 8:27 a.m. CST

    Pitt in Basterds was...

    by DeNiro4Prez

    JUST as good as Waltz was. I could have just as easily seen HIM winning the oscar that Waltz won. But the academy loves them some 'fresh' faces for their supporting actor oscars, so it was Waltz who got the nom and win. Decaprio? I don't hate him as an actor, just resent him for taking up all of Scorsese's time... time that would be better served working with De Niro, of course. QT can't do much wrong, save for Death Proof, but even that was a ballsy, noble faillure.

  • Fuck, you'd think he could write fluent English by accident by now.

  • June 8, 2011, 8:42 a.m. CST

    Idris Elba for Django please

    by Rob

    Also, the DiCaprio was reported days ago.

  • June 8, 2011, 9:02 a.m. CST

    knowthyself

    by pw

    gofuckthyself

  • June 8, 2011, 9:18 a.m. CST

    May be something Leo needs

    by BizarroJerry

    I think he's pretty good, but yes, he really needs to lighten up for a couple of movies. The frowning, tortured, chin-stubble guy seems to have shown up for most of his movies since Gangs of New York. While I know nothing about this movie, I would guess a Tarantino movie is always going to let an actor have some fun, no matter the subject matter. As for Pitt in Basterds, I thought he was a lot of fun, and he was playing completely against type. And while his speech to the troops would've been much better if it wasn't basically shown in the trailer in its entirety, it was still nice. For me, the biggest laugh in the movie was when after saying how well he can speak Italian, he drawls out "Bonjeeorno".

  • June 8, 2011, 9:23 a.m. CST

    Pitt was wonderful in "Basterds"

    by Hipshot

    Once you get the joke: he was playing a bad actor in a bad WW2 movie. The entire film was a winding together of two different types of WW2 movies: the art house "serious" film and the revenge fantasy (like the original "Inglorious Bastards.") As Tarantino cut more rapidly between the two streams of events, they began to blur. When Waltz was finally face to face with Brad Pitt, Waltz' performance became broad and silly--he had fallen into the "other" cinematic world. A wonderful conceit. Tarantino knocked it out of the park.

  • June 8, 2011, 9:28 a.m. CST

    I'd like to see DeCaprio act for a change...

    by JethroBodine

    I know he's got the chops, but he hasn't made any REAL leaps in YEARS!

  • June 8, 2011, 9:40 a.m. CST

    Remember talk of Leo as Anakin?

    by BizarroJerry

    I may have brought this up here before, but I seem to remember back before Attack of the Clones that there were rumors that DiCaprio would be cast as Anakin. Fanboy types were unhappy at the idea of the "pretty boy" Titanic actor would play the character. Looking back, that may have worked well. While he's kind of type-casting himself now, playing the brooding, tortured young Anakin may have helped elevate things a bit. Though I can also imagine him reacting to George Lucas dialogue like Harry Ford.

  • It's definitely helped with his Nicholson mystique... lets him disappear into roles because nobody seems to know fuck all about the actual guy. It's pretty much the exact opposite of what Charlie Sheen is walking into post-sitcom.

  • June 8, 2011, 10:11 a.m. CST

    Leo

    by jasper Stillwell

    I have no doubt that he's a very capable actor indeed but to me it seems like he's being perennially miscast (usually by Scorcese in a bid to secure a reasonable box-office opening). He's usually OK, usually better than you'd expect etc in certain films but as a result of this miscasting we often get Leo frowning like an angry 12-year-old in place of depth, grit or weight. That's not fair to him and certainly not fair to the number of actors that could have been better placed in the central roles in films like The Aviator, Shutter Island, Gangs of New York etc. He worked OK in Inception, which seemed to play to his strengths, but usually DiCaprio's inclusion is a signal for some of the most hamfisted acting you'll see on screen in place of subtlety and understatement. And I reckon he's capable of much more than that.

  • June 8, 2011, 10:38 a.m. CST

    Leo as Landa before Waltz

    by Wcwlkr

    I remember Leo was in talks to play Hans Landa the Jew Hunter before Christophe Waltz got the role. So this could be not trying to miss out on a good role again. I thought Pitt was very good in Basterds even if I didn't love the movie like everyone else. It was good, but I just didn't love it. But I'm excited to see Leo in this. Hope it works out.

  • June 8, 2011, 10:41 a.m. CST

    "I thought of Calvin as being someone in their late 50's or 60's"

    by Turd_Has_Risen_From_The_Gravy

    Yeah, no shit Harry, as did almost everyone who's actually read it, because I'm pretty sure it's in the actual prose description. Di Crapio would be a terrible choice for this great role; thankfully, this will probably be as stupid and unfounded a rumor as Lady Gaga for the part of Lara Lee (Candie's sister in the script). Internet waffle.

  • June 8, 2011, 11:14 a.m. CST

    Warren Beatty was going to be BILL???

    by Jack Desmondi

    Geez, THAT actually would have been great. I've always liked Beatty, but he was always a control freak who had to be over everything as writer/director/producer. Would have been really interested to have seen him in that role that had him guided by another person's hands-especially Tarantino. I liked Carradine, but found him wildly overrated by critics/fans in the role. I think he gave a pretty mannered/affected performance.

  • Because he's Leo.

  • June 8, 2011, 11:27 a.m. CST

    Pitt was pretty terrible in Ingorious Basterds

    by elsewhere

    Frankly he's not that great of an actor period. Much like Depp, it seems like his best acting was earlier in his career.

  • June 8, 2011, 11:27 a.m. CST

    I approve of this casting

    by kafka07

    and that's all you really need is my approval. Now your lives are complete. ;P

  • June 8, 2011, 11:28 a.m. CST

    Bobby D & Jackie Brown & QT's biggest blunder

    by DeNiro4Prez

    I remember shortly after seeing 'Pulp Fiction' for the first time (with several of my high 'high' school buddies in a crowded movie theater after smoking a j in the parking that) that an persistant thought began slowly creeping into my head. Well, two thoughts actually. First, that the movie I just saw may very well have been the best movie I had ever seen, and secondly, that the only way it could have possibly been any better were if Robert De Niro had been in it! Which character? Who knows? Maybe Mr. Wolf. Maybe Butch. Maybe one written especially for him. But the point being, IF QT fucked up with 'Fiction' it was only in NOT casting Robert De Niro. And apparently QT realized this, for in his folow-up he did just that, only in a much lesser movie, and in a throw-away role no less. BUT, my fellow geeks, imagine if you will, IF it were Boddy D. in the Max Cherry role instead of Robert Forster? Ah, what could have been... sure, sure, Forster was great in the role, and it was great to see the dude from Alligator in a starring role again, BUT De Niro would have nailed that shit! And as result, 'Jackie Brown' would have been a worthy successor to 'Pulp Fiction' instead of the bloated, least re-watchable film in QT's cannon.

  • June 8, 2011, 11:28 a.m. CST

    Beatty as Bill

    by Rebel Scumb

    That was the primary thing I remember about that movie before it came out. I think I may have even gone into the theatre under the impression Beatty was going to be Bill.

  • June 8, 2011, 11:29 a.m. CST

    I also would prefer Idris Elba play Django

    by Rebel Scumb

    I'm sure Tarantino could get a good performance out of Will Smith. But this would be the star making performance for Idris Elba, make him a real A lister, and he deserves to be one.

  • June 8, 2011, 11:29 a.m. CST

    "he hasn't made any REAL leaps in YEARS!"

    by elsewhere

    How many years we talking about? He was great in The Departed.

  • June 8, 2011, 12:01 p.m. CST

    Dr. Schultz

    by TheJudger

    I could see Daniel Day Lewis playing him. I really like this character. Very unique and a awesome good guy. You just know the man does not like wickedness. It will be interesting to see what Waltz does with him.

  • June 8, 2011, 12:14 p.m. CST

    deniro4prez

    by SAILOR_RIPLEY

    Completely wrong. Robert Forster's was probably the best performance in Jackie Brown, which is by the way, QT's best film after Pulp Fiction. Forster WAS Max Cherry, and I love the fact that QT tries to revive careers of actors that he admires. He is one of the best directors at casting his roles IMHO. And Leo is a damn fine actor as well. I don't always buy his tough guy roles in say, The Departed but watch his performance in Revolutionary Road and tell me the guy can't act.

  • June 8, 2011, 12:22 p.m. CST

    Rebel scumb

    by Hipshot

    Damned good point. You're right. Smith doesn't need this, although it would be cool. But Elba's never had a chance, and this could be a star turn.

  • June 8, 2011, 12:22 p.m. CST

    Leonardo as a villain= win

    by double_l88

    The boy can act his ass off.

  • June 8, 2011, 1:26 p.m. CST

    Yes Choppah, but part of "Being Leo" is the mystique....

    by Pvt. Duke

    ... provided by his being allowed to make himself scarce. Is he an intellectual? Is he a vapid twit? Is he respectful of others, or is that sense of propriety he exudes a small window into the blackened soul of a haughty cunt? He's clearly still coddled like the child star he once was, although until he goes on a Bale rant and verifies my cynicism, he deserves the benefit of the doubt.

  • June 8, 2011, 1:29 p.m. CST

    Why the fuck do you idiots read scripts before the movie comes out?

    by Knuckleduster

    It's the dumbest fucking thing I've ever heard of. I don't know how on earth you can call yourself a movie fan when you go out of your way to spoil the movie for yourself. Lame.

  • June 8, 2011, 1:46 p.m. CST

    De Niro as Max Cherry...

    by DeNiro4Prez

    Was Robert Forster good in the role of Max Cherry? You bet. Is there anyway in this world or in the next that he would have been better than De Niro in the same role? Hell no! And back to my origional point: QT HAD De Niro- who by his own ommision, would have played ANY character QT offered him, yet casted him in one of the films least memorable roles! Borrowing from Dennis Green, De Niro was who QT thought he was- and he let him off the hook!!!

  • June 8, 2011, 1:52 p.m. CST

    Jackie Brown is a truly great film, and fuck De Niro...

    by Turd_Has_Risen_From_The_Gravy

    That lazy cunt has been coasting in those horrible Fockers movies for years. Foster was absolutely terrific in JB and I'd rather see a hungry, grateful character actor in that role than a phoned-in performance from De Niro. That said, De Niro's supporting performance on Jackie was the only decent thing he's done post Heat/Casino. As for Jackie Brown itself, I'd say that the line between those who love it and those who don't separates the true film lovers, the ones who respect Tarantino's talents but don't gobble his cock, from the fanboys who just want to see Tarantion do 'cool' dialogue and endless pop culture references all the time. Jackie Brown is an immensely rewatchable film with a mature perspective that changes as you get older, and probably is his best work. (note: Django is in part a great script because, for the first time ever, Tarantino doesn't use any pop culture references whatsoever - although that's hard to do anyway, given the historical period - and also writes a linear story for the most part, proving he can do these things if he wants to. It reads like more like a Western novel than the usual mash up he does).

  • June 8, 2011, 2:22 p.m. CST

    turd_has_risen_from_the_gravy re: Deniro, I agree

    by Rebel Scumb

    And I actually think Jackie Brown is one of, if not the best of Tarantino's films. Forester is great as Max Cherry. And subtle as all fuck. Deniro's always been overated as far as I'm concerned. Certainly he's had some great roles, I'm not denying that. But I'm sorry Deniro4prez, but I don't endorse your opinion on this.

  • I remember before Kill Bill came out, that Tarantino was talking about a few films he wanted to do: 1) the vega bros movie 2) Inglorious basterds, although at the time I believe this was going to be more like The Expendables (but set in WWII) and he wanted to get Arnold, Sly, Willis, Van Damme, Segal, etc all into one movie. 3) 500 Lashes. Which he said was a western where Samuel L Jackson played an ex-slave, and convicted murderer who is given a presidential pardon in exchange for him riding around the west and killing the 10 most wanted men in america. I haven't read the Django script, and I don't want to be spoiled so I'm not going to. But I was just curious if anyone knew if Django is a modified version of 500 Lashes, much like how Inglorious basterds evolved so much over time, or if this was an entirely new idea.

  • June 8, 2011, 3:40 p.m. CST

    Leo + QT = Boner Alert

    by Ian Meek

  • Warning Spoilers!!!!! for those who have seen it (which I hope is not very many?) But Not sure why but the memory I have most about it is the scene with SLJ and Bobbie D in the van right before Bobbie D gets offed and SLJ is trying to fig out how he just got screwed and the camera just sits on SLJ's face and just sits there and sits there and sits there while SLJ thinks to himself..It was almost like I could see the wheels turning in his brain..I just love that scene for whatever reason. End Spoilers!!!!..but yeah I remeber when that movie came out..out of all my friends only 3 of us liked it. Some down right hated it...my one friend said the only thing he liked about it was Chris Tucker and after he was no longer in the picture, it went down hill fast, that he couldnt find one redeming quality about it...I'm like wth?? I think the others after watching R Dogs and Pulp Fiction they were expecting something of that ilk. I should get the ones I still associate with to rewatch it again all these years later.

  • June 8, 2011, 4:01 p.m. CST

    Rebel Scumb

    by DrPepperPHD

    If I remember correctly, Tarantino spoke of adapting Elmore Leonard's 40 Lashes Less One and mentioned Sam Jackson in the lead role. The novel is about 2 inmates who pursue Arizona's 5 most wanted men in exchange for their freedom. I haven't read the Django script so I'm not sure if there are any similarities between the two projects other than both being westerns. But thinking about that particular rumor reminded me of the glorious mid 90's when I would use AOL to scour the net for any news of Tarantino while daydreaming about how awesome the new Star Wars trilogy was going to be. :D

  • June 8, 2011, 4:05 p.m. CST

    are you talkin' to me?

    by DeNiro4Prez

    listen here, you fuckin' turd... 'Jackie Brown' was QT's 'Heavens Gate' (or for you more contemporary fucks, 'Gangs of New York). Beautiful to look at, hard not to find something to admire, but ultimately hollow as your fuckin' head! To say that 'Jackie Brown' was better than 'Pulp Fiction' is the same as saying 'Heavens Gate' is better than 'The Deer Hunter'. Go fuck yourself. Hell, even the soundtrack was dissappointing! What the film needed was more De Niro, and in another more prominent role. Whether it be the Max Cherry role, the Sam Jackson role, hell, even the Pam Grier role! He would have nailed that shit too, as he proved with 'Stardust'! PERIOD. And douch bag, this was BEFORE De Niro began phoning it in. He was just two years removed from Heat/Casino, and that same year (97') he turned in probably his last GREAT performance in 'Wag the Dog'. So in other words, POSER, the man was still in his prime! And to say, with a straight fuckin' face no less, that Robert Forster (or fuckin' anybody EVER) could have out-ACTED the legend himself (in his fuckin' prime), in a role he would have no doubt owned? Go fuck yourself! And then wash the cum out of your mouth, you fuckin' stooge!

  • Not sure if anyting extra he would had brought to Max Cherry....Dont see any faults with Robert Forster's performance as Max, another fav scene of mine is him listening to The Delfonic's "Didn't I Blow Your Mind This Time"

  • June 8, 2011, 4:21 p.m. CST

    mrjonz72

    by DrPepperPHD

    Jackie Brown is the shit! I wish QT would do at least one more similar film before he retires. I love that scene where Ordell talks the Chris Tucker character into getting into his trunk. Then you have that crane shot over the fence into the junkyard and we watch from a distance as Sam Jackson opens the trunk and pops him twice. Just a nice, subtle, semi-disturbing murder scene. <p> Definitely watch it again if you haven't for a while.

  • June 8, 2011, 5:21 p.m. CST

    deniro4prez, you are a fucking moron.

    by SAILOR_RIPLEY

    Deniro was perfect as Louis and would not have OWNED the Max Cherry role any better than Forster did. Secondly, anyone who doesn't think Jackie Brown is one of QT's best; most mature and assured films, is a cinematic retard. Go watch Death Proof and shut the fuck up!

  • June 8, 2011, 5:32 p.m. CST

    deniro4prez, you're a funny guy....

    by Turd_Has_Risen_From_The_Gravy

    and, yes, I do mean funny like a clown.

  • June 8, 2011, 5:38 p.m. CST

    mrjonz

    by Rebel Scumb

    I agree, thats a fantastic scene! I always love in movies and tv shows when actors and directors can really sell me on the idea of the wheels turning inside someones head. Jackie Brown also has a bit more substance than most other Tarantino films.

  • Granted, in a very general sense there are some common elements - black slave freed to become a bounty hunter of wanted men - but that's about all. Django, for fear of spilling spoilers, is a very different type of story. It's possible 40 Lashes may have hatched the idea for Django in Tarantino's head to start with. Then again, he was also talking about doing a biopic of John Brown the slave emancipator, riding around the South and killing plantation owners. It may be that all these vague story ideas collapsed into one.

  • June 8, 2011, 5:40 p.m. CST

    drpepperphd

    by Rebel Scumb

    Your comment made me very nostalgic!

  • June 8, 2011, 5:41 p.m. CST

    As for Samuel L Jackson

    by Turd_Has_Risen_From_The_Gravy

    His role in this was definitely my favorite of the script. It'll be good to get him in a Tarantino film again where's he's actually got a substantial part and not just a brief cameo.

  • June 8, 2011, 5:49 p.m. CST

    Sounds good indeed!

    by Rebel Scumb

    I'll be looking forward to this one. I actually almost didn't see Inglorious basterds in the theatre, because the trailers did nothing for me. But a friend convinced me the movie would not be at all what I expected. I'm glad they did, as IG was phenomenal, either 1st or 2nd favorite Tarantino flick, and thats no small compliment I'd probably rate them: 1.Jackie Brown 2. Inglorious Basterds 3. Pulp Fiction 4. Kill Bill vol 1 5. Resovior dogs 6. Death Proof 7. Kill Bill vol 2 But the top 3 are all so neck in neck its tough to say for certain. I really admire pulp fiction, and especially recognize the enormous impact it had on cinema. But I find I get a lot more out of rewatching Jackie Brown. Its the kind of movie if I catch it on tv, and only plan to watch 10minutes of before going to do something else, I'll find somehow I ended up watching the whole thing. The other thing with Pulp fiction is it got so much exposure when it came out, and as a teenage film geek at the time I must of watched it dozens of times. I just can't really get any more out of it at this point that I haven't already. Its a great stylish thrill ride of cinematic art, but it is fairly on the surface, where as Jackie Brown has a lot of nuance and deeper resonance, especially as I get older.

  • June 8, 2011, 5:51 p.m. CST

    Jackie Brown

    by DeNiro4Prez

    Turd, as a QT fan, I'm glad you enjoyed his 1997 misfire 'Jackie Brown'. Nevermind the fact that anybody other than QT's name appeared on the film, you would have no doubt dismissed it as the bloated, albeit interesting mess that it was. And that, fuck face, is what makes you a POSER. Insofar as De Niro is concerned, my point remains: stick him the Max Cherry role, and now we're talking 'Gangs of New York'; another brilliantly bloated mess of a film, but one in which had one trully great, mesmerizing performance (Day Lewis as the Butcher, naturally) that elevated the entire film to water-cooler status. Nobody walked out of that movie clamoring about the fucking convoluted story, or the clumsy, adolesent acting from Decaprio and Diaz... Nope. Only that in that mediocre, long as fuck film, Daniel Day Lewis kicked all kinds of ass! And THAT is what could have saved 'Jackie Brown'. And THAT is where QT fucked up. And that is your ass being handed to you.

  • I'd be praising the hell out of it. I loved it at the time it was released and I love it now. And this coming from someone who was pretty fed up of all the rampant, OTT Tarantino praise in the mid-90's, usually by kids who didn't know all the past films he had pillaged ideas from. So your assumptions are completely wrong. Whatever De Niro would have been like in the role of Max Cherry is irrelevant, because Foster was note perfect in the part. Therefore, other actors could have done different takes on the character, but not a better take. And that's a crucial point. Also crucial is the fact that the other two leads were phenomenal (arguably Jackson's best ever role, too), that the film was tastefully directed, had a terrific script, kick ass soundtrack, etc. Everything was at a high level, so it was not a film depending on a single great performance to elevate it above mediocrity.

  • Been like 10 years.

  • June 8, 2011, 7:10 p.m. CST

    deniro4prez

    by Rebel Scumb

    I do agree that gangs of new york is terrible. But then I'm in the minority that thinks that most of scoreseses film are pretentious. Regardless. You're overlooking a key point about Max Cherry and Jackie Brown. The entire theme of the movie is about people who are passed their prime, and forgotten. jackie and max are both people who life moved on without them, relics of an earlier day. Its not an accident that Tarantino cast two actors who did all their best work in the 1970s and had not really done any signifigant work since. Look at the supporting cast QT built around them Deniro, fonda, SLJ, Michael keaton. He was coming off the hype of pulp fiction. Everyone wanted to work with him. He could easily have gotten 2 a list actors to play max and jackie. He choose two actors he admired from his youth. 2 actors brought with them not just the ability to play the roles right, but who brought with them a whole package of history with them, as actors. You are right in your position in that if deniro played Max it would be a completely different movie. But it wouldn't be the right movie, the entire point would be lost. it would just be a deniro crime thriller, a star vehicle. I'm sorry you didn't enjoy the movie more, nothing anyone here can do about that.

  • June 8, 2011, 7:30 p.m. CST

    As for Dicaprio being in this movie...

    by Rebel Scumb

    I haven't read the script so I couldn't say whether he's right or wrong for the part. I do agree though as someone said above that Leo has a very specific cadence and rhythm to the way he speaks when acting which would work very well with the way QT writes dialogue. I know apparently the character is suppose to be much older. But I think sometimes really interesting characters arise from someone being cast at a different age or appearance then what is on the page. Like Benecio del toro in the usual suspects. That character was originally planned for dean stockwell or someone like him. Christina hendricks on Mad Men's character Joan was suppose to be a rail thin old spinster, with a stick up her ass. Even current doctor who Matt smith is really interesting to watch as a guy in his mid 20s playing an old curmudgeony man. So I think dicaprio could be good in this.

  • June 8, 2011, 8:02 p.m. CST

    More on Jackie Brown...

    by DeNiro4Prez

    Rebel, I appreciate your take on the casting choices made by QT in regards to 'Jackie Brown' (hell, maybe you're on to something, I dunno?). But me personally, I don't completely agree with your assesment. QT has made a carreer of casting 'forgetten' relics from a forgone era (Travolta, Keitel, hell, even Bunker). And 'Jackie Brown' was certainly no exception. But- and here's the kicker- he also has made a carreer of writing phenomenal parts for supporting characters for A-list actors (Willis, Pitt, etc.). And if I'm QT (with an admitted man-crush on Rober De Niro), with said individual chomping at the bit to be in your next film, seems to me a better part could have been awarded to him? As in one of the two male leads! You got the best actor ever, and you give him the part of bumbling, dim-witted, ex-con, errand boy Louis! In other words, you don't land Daniel Day Lewis for 'Gangs of New York' and cast him in the Neeson role. You just don't do it!

  • June 8, 2011, 8:04 p.m. CST

    Script link?

    by ImperialMarchFace

    Anyone know where I can read this? The Inglorious Basterds script just made me 10x more excited for that movie.

  • June 8, 2011, 8:17 p.m. CST

    DeNiro's "always been overrated" and he's "had SOME great roles"

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    Whoa ... hold on ... hold on ... whoa ... I mean ... uh ... whoa ... um ... Just gimme a minute here ... wow. Uh ... Well ... hmmm ... uh ... whoaaaa ... uh ... yeah ... Hold on. Just a sec. Okay ... wow. Shit ... this one's a doozy. Where to begin ... ? RAGING BULL THE DEER HUNTER GOODFELLAS A BRONX TALE THIS BOY'S LIFE CAPE FEAR AWAKENINGS BRAZIL BANG THE DRUM SLOWLY MEAN STREETS THE GODFATHER, PART II 1900 THE LAST TYCOON TAXI DRIVER ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA MIDNIGHT RUN HEAT CASINO THE KING OF COMEDY JACKIE BROWN Okay, granted he hasn't been so great recently, but HOLY FUCK DO YOU SEE THAT LIST OF PERFORMANCES HE'S GIVEN? THE MAN IS A FUCKING LIVING LEGEND. HIS PERFORMANCE IN RAGING BULL MAY WELL BE THE GREATEST IN CINEMA HISTORY. CINEMA HISTORY. CINEMA. HISTORY. CINEMA. HISTORY. OVERRATED??? SOME GOOD ROLES???? ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR FUCKING MIND?? CHOPPED.

  • June 8, 2011, 9:14 p.m. CST

    Leo is wrong for the part, but i know why QT wants him

    by Billy_D_Williams

    QT is doing pre-damage control on the controversial nature of the material...as much as QT tackles difficult themes and events in his films, slavery in america is the one thing everyone wants to forget and makes people uncomfortable, and especially with the liberal use of the word "nigger" in the film, I'm sure Leo is just some solid insurance for this movie to make sure it... casting Leo makes no sense given the way the character is written, first of all he's older, second he's played as an extremely flamboyant, womanizing heavy, with a very specific souther flavor, which Leo has never played and probably isn't capable of pulling off, at least not as much as a solid character actor, which is what the part needs...I'm sure after Will Smith passed QT scrambled to shoehorn a star into the movie...why else would we JUST NOW be hearing about this news and not around the time of the Will Smith rumblings weeks ago??? its obvious QT needs an A-lister in the movie as insurance and didn't have Leo in mind when writing the part.

  • June 8, 2011, 9:17 p.m. CST

    Leo is wrong for the part (part 2)

    by Billy_D_Williams

    ...and hence is going to slightly ruin his own movie because he's not casting the movie, but casting the marketing/the trailer/the poster/the tabloids, etc...im not saying the movie will be bad, not at all, im saying it wont be as good as it CAN be because of this

  • June 9, 2011, 7:50 a.m. CST

    Has Smith Passed?

    by Hipshot

    I hadn't heard that. I knew there would need to be some re-writing, but hoped they'd come to an understanding. Curiously, my biggest problem with the script was the treatment of his wife, who was too passive and accepting of her fate. Trust me: black women will not be pleased, and I figured Jada would give Tarantino an earful. Wouldn't have been hard to fix, though...a couple of different facial expressions, a line of dialog, a single action at the end of the film could fix it.

  • June 9, 2011, 9:13 a.m. CST

    Here's an article on casting...

    by Hipshot

    http://www.reelzchannel.com/movie-news/10649/leonardo-dicaprio-to-join-quentin-tarantino-in-django-unchained/ It doubts Smith will sign on, noting how long it's taking. Probably wants too much money, and too much rewriting. Substitutes mentioned are Idris Elba, Jamie Foxx and...Chris Tucker. I hope that last part is a joke. Tucker is a moderately talented guy who lucked into "Rush Hour" and can't make any other movies without lowering his "Quote" (at least that's my take on why he doesn't work. He doesn't dare appear in a flop). Jamie Foxx could do quite well, but Elba would be the real gold here.

  • June 9, 2011, 9:40 a.m. CST

    QT should go with an unknown

    by DeNiro4Prez

    Really excited about this project. 'Basterds' was QT's best since 'Fiction', and really interested to see how he is going to follow that up. That being said, I think it's a crime that only a few 'obvious' names are being mentioned for the title role (are there REALLY only three or four black actors in that age range working today???). Will Smith would have been interesting only in that it would have enabled him to play against 'type' for a change. But Jamie Fox? You've got to be kidding me! Why not go with an unknown 'black' actor? There simply has to be one! And build a strong supporting cast around him. Sam Jackson seems to be locked, as does Waltz (that dude is gold- wife dragged me to 'Water for Elephants'- he was even platinum in that train wreck!), so seems to me the strong supporting cast is already taking shape. QT's the man, and if anybody can find new talent (or forgotten talent), it's him! Now, that being said, I believe a strong supporting role for Robert De Niro is in order. Nobody this side of Billy Bob Thornton can play backwards redneck like Boddy D. (Capefear)! Yep. That's it. Recipe for success.

  • and I realize that this is going to sound crazy but there is a part of me that feels that Micheal Jai White can fit right in, in a exploitation movie kinda way in that type of role. Thats assuming this is going to be an exploitation type of movie..but if Im wrong correct me. Anyway but yeah I def say Idras def top pick for me.

  • June 9, 2011, 10:01 a.m. CST

    No Michael Jai White

    by Hipshot

    He's too physically imposing. While he's a decent actor, his real strength is that he is the best martial artist/actor combination in a long time, if not ever. QT would have to rewrite the entire script to play to his strengths. So...love me some MJW, but it'll never happen.

  • June 9, 2011, 2:53 p.m. CST

    DiCaprio brings nothing to the table.

    by Mister Grieves

    He is a one note performer only capable of pulling off an over the top performance as a frightened, confused, man-child having an emotional breakdown. He is not worthy of the roles he gets and the talent he gets paired with. Leonardo DiCaprio is the godfather of Shia Labeouf's career.

  • June 9, 2011, 3:34 p.m. CST

    Just throw Fred Ward in there and be done with it.

    by Somerichs

    I don't have any idea what the movie's about and I guarantee it'll be better if Fred Ward is in it...

  • June 9, 2011, 3:35 p.m. CST

    Read this in METRO like a week ago

    by BenBraddock

  • June 9, 2011, 4:09 p.m. CST

    Love Will Smith, but not as Django.

    by TylerScruggs

    I can't see it. Hopefully QT can prove me wrong. Also, Jackie Brown is one of my fav Tarantino movies. Fuck Kill Bill.

  • June 9, 2011, 4:12 p.m. CST

    I have officially been CHOPPED!

    by Rebel Scumb

    Okay granted, I think I may have overstated my case on deniro, I will in my defense say I was suffering from heat stroke when I wrote that comment. But choppah you made your case well with a lot of hard evidence, so I'll give you this one.

  • I'm asking as a legit question and not to be facetious (sp?) I'm just trying to picture what this character is suppose to be like? Like Brian Cox? Gene Hackman? Robert Duvall? John Slatterly? (of mad men) Sam Sheppard? John Terry (from LOST)

  • But I'm going to stick with Idris Elba as my first choice. The guy should be a huge movie star by now, for his work on The Wire alone Josh Holloway to, I can't believe that guy isn't plastered all over movie posters yet.

  • June 9, 2011, 4:42 p.m. CST

    the actor i had in my mind while reading Candie...

    by Billy_D_Williams

    was the heavy set lawyer in "The Insider" (coincidentally one of QT's fav movies), the onew who yells "WIPE THAT SMIRK OFF YOUR FACE!!!!" to the tobacco guy, he's been in quite a few movies and would be light years better than Leo. the problem with Leo is he's too one note and brings too much movie star baggage to a role that is way outside his range...maybe im wrong.

  • June 9, 2011, 4:55 p.m. CST

    billy_d_williams: The Insider is in my top 10 films of all time!

    by Rebel Scumb

    And that guy (forget his name) has one of the best scenes in the whole film "Oh you've got rights... and lefts. UPS-and-DOWNS-and-MIDDLES. So what!"

  • June 9, 2011, 5:13 p.m. CST

    Bruce McGill

    by Mister Grieves

    And yes, he would be better than DiCaprio, but I doubt Tarantino would risk him in the role, as he's such a familiar character actor.

  • June 9, 2011, 5:58 p.m. CST

    Any links to the script???

    by lostokie

    I'd love to read it if anyone wanted to send my a PDF of the script. I don't want to make money on it or leak the script. I just would like to read it. Anyone??? goodbrowngravy@sbcglobal.net