Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News



Quentin Tarantino has still got it.

Not that there’s ever been a question of the filmmaker losing his way or his nerve for that matter, but it really is something to see a director of his ilk churning out masterpiece after masterpiece, as if each new picture he makes seems to have him coming into his best form. Each new movie is immediately thrust into the conversation of being his best, and DJANGO UNCHAINED is no different. As he’s done with various genres in the past, be it crime drama, exploitation, swordplay or historical fantasy, Tarantino bends and twists them to his liking, putting his own unique stamp on the conventions that have become synonymous with these type of pictures. This time, it’s the Spaghetti Western that’s got his eye, as DJANGO UNCHAINED tells the story of a hero’s quest to rescue his wife and exact a bit of revenge from those who’ve done him wrong along the way set against the backdrop of the Deep South during the days of slavery.

That hero is the titular character Django, played brilliantly by Jamie Foxx, a freed slave who enters into a partnership with King Schultz – the always mesmorizing Christoph Waltz – a dentist-turned-bounty hunter, who agrees to help Django on his search to find his beloved Broomhilda (Kerry Washington) in exchange for some time and assistance tracking down and killing wanted white folks to make money. I haven’t always been a big Foxx fan, but where I’ve found him most effective is in these roles that begin quite soft-spoken but allow plenty of room for his moxie to break through as his character is forced to rise to the occasion to accomplish something great. It was a similar arc for Foxx in COLLATERAL, which, to this point, I found to be his most even work. But Foxx absolutely shines here as the focal point of DJANGO, bringing both a quiet subtlety and a rough-edged force to the character when necessary. Even in his most understated moments, there’s still this underlying fire present to his demeanor that Foxx naturally brings to the role, allowing for a smooth transition between this captive Negro who fears the repercussions of his slave traders and a free black man who exudes a certain confidence that comes with having to answer to no one but himself. Back when I read through an early draft of the script many months back, that was when Will Smith seemed to be Tarantino’s top choice for the lead, and I was quite intrigued to see him do something so different from his usual material. After watching Foxx absolutely own the role, I can’t imagine it played any better by anyone.

Let me not take anything away from Waltz though, who is equally as important as Django in making the film work, as without his half of the partnership, the film would lack elegance only he can offer through a delightfulness that permeates his words. Whether it’s been as the charming yet ruthless Hans Landa in Tarantino’s INGLOURIOUS BASTARDS or the wasted villain in GREEN HORNET, Waltz commands your attention every moment he’s on-screen, and that charisma changes not a bit in DJANGO, with Waltz providing some semblance of a moral compass during this dark mark in America’s history, which is ironic in its own right since the one white man present who does not believe in slavery does believe in the killing of people for reward. This is a part Tarantino wrote specifically for Waltz, and, following his award-winning supporting performance in BASTARDS, it shows that this working relationship is capable of something special everything they choose to work together. The quick-witted dialogue that emerges from the end of Tarantino’s pen just rolls off the tip of Waltz’s tongue with ease, whether excitedly relaying a German folktale to unfamiliar ears, verbally jousting with Leonardo DiCaprio’s despicable villain or bantering swiftly with Django in a conversation about the meaning of the word “positive.” Waltz has been a tour de force in every film he’s taken on thus far, but he seems to raise his game even further when it’s one from the mind of QT.

Let’s get to DiCaprio though, who seems to be having a blast playing the most vile and disgusting character he’s ever inhabited in his career, Monsieur Calvin Candie, a Francophile incapable of speaking the simplest French who owns the large plantation known as Candyland. It’s here that he’s taken to occupying his time betting on Mandingo fighting, a bloodsport pitting male slaves against each other to the death while their owners cheer on the brutality, and renting out ponies – female slaves used for “comfort” – to those who come calling for such services. It’s also where Django will find his wife, leading to a plan being devised by the bounty hunting duo to hustle Candie in a deal so sweet, it’d be ridiculous to refuse… a deal that would have them walking away with Broomhilda as merely an afterthought. That makes for plenty of gamesmanship between Schultz and Candie, two men who have a bit of disdain for the other right off the bat, as they try to negotiate a deal they can both live with. Watching DiCaprio’s Candie operate as if he’s getting the best of this pairing is an absolute joy, no matter how villainous the character is. We’ve never gotten to see this side of DiCaprio, and frankly I want to see more. I beg someone to please give this gifted actor more opportunities to play bad guys with this amount of meat. We’ve seen him play sweet and heroic with plenty of complexity on numerous occasions, but in this taste of DiCaprio embracing a bit of evil, I believe we’ve only really scratched the surface of what he’s capable of on-screen… and that’s saying a lot when you consider the career he’s had to this point.


DiCaprio doesn’t bring the bad all by himself though, as Candie is constantly accompanied by his house Negro Stephen (Samuel L. Jackson), who is all too eager to turn against his fellow slaves for the benefits it affords him in being in such good standing with the master. There are moments when you can make the argument that Stephen is much more of an awful human being than Calvin Candie for doing everything in his power to maintain the status quo, to keep his fellow Negroes down, by eliminating any and every chance they may have for happiness, joining in on their degradation whenever he can. He’s a cantankerous personality who puts all of his deviousness into foiling whatever Django may have going on behind the scenes at the plantation he calls home. No Negro is going to come riding in on a horse and get away with it. Samuel L. Jackson has turned out plenty of memorable performances over the years, and now he can add his turn as Stephen among his finest.

DJANGO UNCHAINED isn’t without its share of Tarantino flair either, as one of the film’s big gunfights definitely doesn’t lack in squibs to splatter the scene with blood spray. On top of that, you’ve got that Tarantino-infused dialogue sure to make you laugh at all the right moments (as evidenced by a great group argument about whether an early version of a Ku Klux Klan should wear bags over the head, regardless of the problems they bring) while also adding a serious gravity to this rescue and revenge tale by painting an in-your-face portrayal of slavery right before the Civil War. Add in your traditionally great soundtrack for a Tarantino flick, and you’ve got one hell of a movie.

While the subject matter is hardly light at times, there is a great degree of fun to be had watching DJANGO UNCHAINED. You can see the passion Tarantino has for the project in every frame that comes across the screen, and that gets passed down to you as a member of the audience who is sure to be swept away by this simple story he’s put together with strong characters you want to spend nearly three hours of your life with. Don’t be surprised to find DJANGO UNCHAINED high up on my Top 10 list for the year, because this is a great piece of film and another instance where Tarantino takes his best shot at topping his previous works and comes pretty damn close to succeeding. 


-Billy Donnelly

"The Infamous Billy The Kidd"

Follow me on Twitter.

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Dec. 19, 2012, 9:29 p.m. CST

    cant wait

    by Stifler's Mom

    Tarantino gets a lifetime pass for PULP FICTION and RESERVOIR DOGS alone.

  • Dec. 19, 2012, 9:48 p.m. CST

    The "D" is silent.

    by Daytripper69

    The script is available online in Weinstein's website, for Oscar consideration. Stopped reading after the fourth page, though ... I cannot wait for Christmas Day! Tarantino still has it.

  • Dec. 19, 2012, 9:50 p.m. CST

    Can't Wait 2

    by krull rules

    I'll have a shot and a beer while watching this one... Ahhh 21+ theaters, Tarantino was made for you... Can't wait for the day I can Vaporize in one... Nothing a kushcake can't solve...

  • Dec. 19, 2012, 10:02 p.m. CST

    The man hasn't made a movie I haven't liked.

    by Ian Masterson

    Even "Death Proof" was moderately entertaining. Incredibly psyched for this.

  • Dec. 19, 2012, 10:09 p.m. CST

    Avoding All Reviews

    by Michael Thompson

    Trying to go in spoiler free as possible.

  • Dec. 19, 2012, 10:14 p.m. CST

    The Kidd doesn't mention the beautiful cinematography in this

    by thelordofhell

    Gorgeous scenery shots are all over this thing

  • Dec. 19, 2012, 10:22 p.m. CST

    Foxx & Tarantino both look like inbred mongoloids

    by BoRock_A_Boomer

    and probably are

  • Dec. 19, 2012, 10:25 p.m. CST

    Should've been played by Captain Panaka

    by BNITT need a cynical, eye patched bastard to slap wimpy DiCaprio across the face with his black, Alabama, one eyed python snake!

  • Dec. 19, 2012, 10:27 p.m. CST

    is told in straight forward linear fashion this time?

    by Hugh Gustavus

    I am sick of tarantino trying to be clever for clevers sake

  • Dec. 19, 2012, 10:28 p.m. CST

    Leo is craving that Oscar by this point

    by terry1978

    He puts in work in every role, but I seriously suspect this will be the one that nets it.

  • Dec. 19, 2012, 10:46 p.m. CST


    by Donovan

    I'm fuggin HARD for this movie. I shit you not.

  • Dec. 19, 2012, 10:46 p.m. CST

    Seriously pumped for this.

    by Mr. Voodoo Potato Head

    Tarantino hasn't let me down yet.

  • Dec. 19, 2012, 10:57 p.m. CST

    Django Fett Uncloned

    by frenetik1

    c'mon Disney, get working on it!

  • lol

  • Dec. 19, 2012, 11:08 p.m. CST



  • Dec. 19, 2012, 11:28 p.m. CST

    Three dimples


    I predict DiCaprio's "three dimples" speech will become a classic Tarantino set piece, enjoying the same kind of infamy as Dennis Hopper's "Moors are n*ggers" from True Romance among cinephiles. And if DiCaprio isn't nominated for a best supporting tilt, then the academy is bogus.

  • Dec. 19, 2012, 11:30 p.m. CST

    The name of this movie is "suck my Harry balls"

    by John Walker

    And he's seen it for about a month now.

  • Death Proof was 100% chronological, as was Inglourious Basterds (albiet split amongst three parallel protagonists). I think his funky splintering of chronology is something he's essentially grown out of.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 12:08 a.m. CST

    Versus! The new 'first'!

    by T

    Or last.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 12:13 a.m. CST

    Tarantino doesn't make movies...he makes cinematic mix-tapes

    by Cassius_Crackhead

    He's like one of those self-important club DJ's who take snippets of other people's work and then he tweaks it by putting some fancy screechy shitty sound effects on it and somehow has the audacity to call it "art". This guy's been in a creative downspin since Kill Bill. The whole exploitation "homage" thing is so played the fuck out. Just adapt another Elmore Leonard novel for fucks sake or retire and write a series of film review books or something. Jesus.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 12:21 a.m. CST

    Wasn't a big fan of Death Proof

    by Jaster Mareel

    Or as i call it "Babbling Bitches", but other than that Tarantino is aces in my book.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 12:45 a.m. CST

    You sure said "negro" a whole lot.

    by GhostDad

    I like that you chose to write a period appropriate review.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 1:42 a.m. CST

    Samuel Jackson vs Anne Hathaway sad-off!

    by eudofarkencrog

    given your two reviews (apologies if this is already mentioned somewhere) thought you would enjoy this:

  • If you worked for a contemporary blog your ass would be canned by morning.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 1:45 a.m. CST


    by jasonzappa

    Eat shit

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 1:48 a.m. CST

    So is EVERY critic in Texas Applauding this movie??

    by doom master

    Apart from the crew who at least have the decency to keep their lips away from QTs Texas-born ass and deliver a realistic review of this movie? Cmon man...All pluses and NO minuses? NONE? You're fucking joking, man.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 1:50 a.m. CST

    By the way "Negro" is the origin of the term...

    by doom master

    Unless of course you wanna call black folks "Browns" - which is technically what the color of their skin really is. No need to niggle the term Negro...No pun intended.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 2:01 a.m. CST

    Doom master

    by Eyegore

    It doesn't surprise me that a new Tarantino movie gets all good reviews. He's a genius filmmaker, you doofus. Also, you should stop talking about race. You're way behind the times and sound like a flaming racist.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 2:30 a.m. CST

    Did The Kidd gun down every other writer on this site?

    by David Duchovny

    wth is going on? The Kidd is versusing everything.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 2:57 a.m. CST

    I like every Tarantino movie

    by CuervoJones

    Yes, even that boring Grindhouse thing. I can´t wait for this one.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 3:05 a.m. CST

    Wow look, a film critic sucking on Tarantino's nob...

    by heyoucantlaughatthat

    Though the Kidd's review features compliments that are wholly original to the world of Tarantino, it lacks the spark and originality that made his reviews such a breath of fresh air in the first place. Kidd panders to the obligatory audience that mindlessly follows any Tarantino production without hesitation, while thoughtlessly confirming many of the charms that Tarantino's films have long inhabited since their inception. Minor issues aside, Tarantino invites the comparison to his last opus, "Inglorious Basterds", another film well worth the mantle of Masterpiece

  • Which makes him like everybody else. So what if he doesn't like most of the movies being released? I certainly can relate to that. Because most movies are either bad or quite milquetoast. What's to praise about that? I don't always agree with The Kidd's opinions, but that's beside the point. That the movies he likes are fewer then those he dislikes does actually make a whole lot of sense. Don't you agree?

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 3:38 a.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    And what is exactly wrong in praising a good talented director and the good movies he makes? At least there's more to Tarantino movies then just over-busy hype for shallow empty-headed fluff.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 3:47 a.m. CST

    doom master

    by AsimovLives

    Well, yes, but thing is, the "brown" epithet was usually used for other "races", like the indians or the malasyans. The blacks were called either "negros" or "darkies". In fact, "negro" was the polite form to adress a black person. The word got a bit of blamish this days because most people confuse "negro" with "nigger" thanks to a somewhat similiar phonology. Fact is, in certain languages like spanish and my own natuve portuguese, "negro" is still the polite form, while "black" is derrogatory. It might have to do how the words roll on the tongue, because in spanish and portuguese negro is a soft word, while black (prieto/preto) is harsh sounding.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 3:48 a.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    At least somebody is doing something.

  • There are certain movies that i can't think of a single negative thing to say about them because i believe they did everything right. So why invent some non-existent flaw so to give the apearence of "even-handedness"? If a movie everything works, then just fucking say it. Yeah, there are movies like that. How's that so hard to accept?

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 4:14 a.m. CST

    Maybe a Tarantino Captain Sternn movie?

    by Cedric Ford

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 4:31 a.m. CST

    cedhollywood, a SF Tarantino movie? I'd like to see that.

    by AsimovLives

    Also, a medieval Tarantino movie. Can you imagine the tagline? "This Summer, Tarantino is going medieval on your asses".

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 4:47 a.m. CST

    Tarantino is a director of limited range. Extremely limited.

    by jamesonian

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 5:03 a.m. CST

    Wasn't Django a white guy? Played by Franco Nero?

    by ratpack223

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 5:48 a.m. CST


    by Hipshot

    The most common myths racists and southern apologists use include 1) slaves were expensive, so no one would abuse them 2) they were better off than northern "wage slaves" 3) that Irish Indentured Servents (usually for a period of under seven years, and voluntarily entered into) was equivalent 4) whites would have "gotten over it" sooner 5) slavery would have ended soon without the Civil War 6) There was no sexual abuse or rape going on (Dinesh D'Souza comes up with that doozy in "The End of Racism") and on and on. It's pitiful, and ignores history totally. etc. etc.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 6:11 a.m. CST

    Only mediocre since Jackie Brown

    by iamdavebowers

    Kill Bill is okay, but bloated, Death Proof was bad and was schooled by Planet Terror, and Inglorious Bastards was a fine movie, but generally forgettable.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 7:15 a.m. CST

    DiCaprio channeling James Coburn..

    by houbou

    Maybe I'm wrong, but somehow, I feel that in this movie, DiCaprio channels some James Coburn.. Could be the beard, or the mannerism.. or all of it..

  • I don't like westerns, I don't like Jamie Foxx and I loathe DiCaprio. Not a lot of appeal from the get go.

  • I don't like westerns, I don't like Jamie Foxx and I loathe DiCaprio. Not a lot of appeal from the get go.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 7:39 a.m. CST

    You'll be sitting up in your seat when that kicks in.

    by UltraTron

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 7:41 a.m. CST

    Oh and have someone else drive.

    by UltraTron

  • Guys, I'm so far to the right I make you bitches look like Noam Chomsky. I'm so far to the right I want to re-animate Ayn Rand's corpse so I can slap her in the face for pussying out and not going far enough. But this whole meme out there that this movie is *liberal* and *racist* because a black guy is killing white people is FUCKING RIDICULOUS. Guess what, douchebags? If the Nat Turner or John Brown rebellions had succeeded, and the slaves had risen and slaughtered every last slaveholding family in the South and burned the continent to the ground, THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN THE GOOD GUYS. I can't think of a better good guy than an ex-slave killing slaveholders. Don't like it? Then you're immoral. Sorry. A slave killing his oppressors is the definition of the totally in-the-right hero. No matter what color he is and no matter what color the slaveholding scum he kills are. And if the director uses the slave rebellion story to sneak in other liberal stuff, like Kubrick did, well, that's just the price we pay to see a cool story about killing slaveowners.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 7:45 a.m. CST

    Like duuur.

    by UltraTron

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 7:53 a.m. CST

    Do drugs kids.

    by UltraTron

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 7:57 a.m. CST

    Basterds was so dull.

    by knowthyself

    Does this film also have endless scenes of bullshit dialogue about movies?

  • jumping on the back of the sofa like you're probably used to doing while watching six million dollar man.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 8:20 a.m. CST

    all white people *ARE* evil, right?

    by Boofalicious Washington

    ...or are you so jealous of minorities that you want to be a perpetual victim too? Man the fuck up, pussy

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 8:27 a.m. CST

    by Cobra--Kai

    Expect to see it high up on your top ten list for the year? Kidd there werent ten films you liked this year. What a moaning little bitch.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 8:34 a.m. CST

    The Kidd FIGHTS all of the movies so you don't have to

    by SifoDyasJr

  • Don't get the love for this guy. Sure, his casting in Basterds was perfect, but that was Tarantinos doing. He was unwatchable in Green Hornet (as the rest of the film).

  • Its all homage to seventies, of to Grindhouse, or to exploitation cinema etc. etc. I get why people love him and I get that he is successful, but I am almost always severly underwhelmed by his movies. Reservoir Dogs was great, because it was fresh. Everything after that was feeling like rehashing to me.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 8:55 a.m. CST

    The "D" is for...

    by Marc Cerasini


  • Dec. 20, 2012, 9 a.m. CST

    The A is silent

    by UltraTron

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 9:25 a.m. CST

    What would be a thread without ultratron's title only posts?

    by AsimovLives

    Total boredom, that's what! Thank goodness he's around. The day such legendary guys like him go away this place dies.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 9:26 a.m. CST

    @naruto_uzimaki You sound Republican

    by NathanGrey

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 9:31 a.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    Well, that's the problem with the ten best lists, isn't it? If the year didn't provided you with enough movies you enjoyed, for completion sake you have to bite the bullet and include movies you really didn't liked. Or you have an incomplete list and it makes you look like you can't count to ten. Damn if you do, damn if you don't. Personally, i think all those Best Ten lists are nonsense.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 9:37 a.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    Actually that's kinda of reason why critics exist in the first place.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 9:47 a.m. CST

    by Cobra--Kai

    Asi - youre back! Good to see you posting again old chap. Youve been gone for a while, and I have to ask in that time were you moonlighting under the alternative name scirocco?

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 9:54 a.m. CST

    office use of the word Negro

    by doom master

    white folks glide their their finger over their hand when referring to black people Ironically the same applies to blacks referring to whites, which I find amusing lol What does this have to do with Django? Not a damn thing. But I'm not stupid enough to use the word "nigger" when I know it's an insult...but at the same time I'm also not one to use a "safe" term like "African American" because it makes you sound like you're trying to avoid the word Negro or Black.... So don't call me racist...I'm not a racist - I hate everyone equally - i dont care what color your skin is..

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 9:57 a.m. CST

    I sent the Kidd a DJANGO review almost two weeks ago

    by D.Vader

    AICN could have had the early word and been at the forefront. But... no. They lazily decide to follow the pack, as usual.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 10:02 a.m. CST

    anyway my point is:

    by doom master

    QT is a genius because he makes a movie and uses words/slang/subject matter that any normal filmmaker would shy away from? And it's cool and hip because it's QT? You do realize Death Proof was an overlong pile of crap, right? QT isn't a genius - he's just a guy who made a movie that hit a nerve at just the right time in the cultural mindset that was regressing into the nostalgia for the 70s. His movie is noticed, applauded and QT hits it big...And makes a name for himself in the 00s as the 70s nostalgia flares and explodes into pop culture. Now he makes a Western Blaxploitation inspired movie... Interesting yes, but I'm sure it would have fared much better had this been made after Jackie Brown or Kill Bill....Nevermind the overuse of the term "Negro" or his slavery torture scenes... You know, I DID see Roots....

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 10:15 a.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    Yeah, that was me, for sure. Why even pretend i was not scirocco? You guys are way too smart not to catch on me easily. And for the record, i am also BladeRunnerUnit, ArkadyRenko and Memories-Of-Murder. And i don't think i missed out on any other alias. Not that you wouldn't know, of course. But if you don't mind, i'd like to be called AsimovLives, it's my favorite of all my nicks. I'd appreciate it, thanks.

  • Basically to call a black person an african-american or an indian as native-american is still to make distinction because of race. It's the old shit with a new paint job. And it's just plain stupid grammar. A native is anybody who was born in a certain place, so anybody who was born in the USA is a native american. Why the word native should be more apt for an indian then anybody else from any other race is absurd and stupid. Also, african-american is a false denomination, because i'm quite certain the vast majority of blacks living in USA were born in the USA and not in some african country and later emigrated to America. It's just such bulslhit. It's just perpectuating racial difference with political-correctness bullshit. I'm a left-winger (which by american standards makes me a pinko commie even though if i'm no communist but that would be same difference to you) but i hate political-correctness because it's phoney. You can't be an humanist with phoneyness, it's a contradiction in terms.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 10:23 a.m. CST


    by The Garbage Man

    What's funny is the same people you're describing probably LOVE (and rightly so) "Conan the Barbarian."

  • You should had known better.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 10:28 a.m. CST

    I "should had known better"?

    by D.Vader

    Known better than to think AICN would post it?

  • Asi, we Libs should tread lightly when discussing politics on AICN mainly because it brings out the extreme loony Rightwing nutjobs. OOPS!

  • Methinks Golden Globe Nomination perhaps?

  • Denish is basically an Indian version of an Uncle Tom. Who takes this fool along with that Tranny Ann Coulter seriously?

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 10:52 a.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    It was my atempt at a joke based on the new "one month" meme that's been going on since Harry's Jack Reacher review. Obviously, i failed miserably.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 11:02 a.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    Ah... right! I should had know! Not that i'm affraid of them, but i know what you mean. Avoiding turning things nasty and idiotic is a good way to conduct business here. By the way, never ever call an european left-winger a liberal, because it doesn't mean the same thing. In fact, liberals are right-wingers, they are this right-winger market obsessed folls who are responsible for the econimic fuck up that exists in today's economy. In fact, it's very weird for a european to see an american left-winger calling himself a liberal because liberalism is anything but left-winger. Fun fact, hem? By the way, i missed out chinwags, man! You know you have always been one of my favorite people here. I hope my new more open honesty helps me endure in this threads a bit longer and avoid another banning. I have been getting the banhammer so much and for so long my ass glows in the dark.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 11:07 a.m. CST

    Leonard DiCaprio is a very talented actor, he can play anything.

    by AsimovLives

    Yes, he's disgustingly good looking, the man won the genetic lotery. But to deny him the talent he obviously has is just foolhardy foolishness. Yes, i know, many of you guys caught your girlfriends of the 90s masturbating in the shower while looking at his picture at the time of the Titanic madness and it hurted your soul. But that was 15 years ago, it was not really his fault, and the man has redeamed himself beyond the call of duty.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 11:17 a.m. CST

    Oh! Right-o, Asi!

    by D.Vader

    I've been watching DJANGO UNCHAINED for a month now, and all that.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 11:19 a.m. CST

    Lol @ people always having a go at kidd for negative reviews..

    by Miss Moneypennys Pishflapsh

    When 90% of fucking talkbackers piss and fucking moan about EVERY FUCKING FILM EVER FUCKING MADE!!!!!!!!!

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 11:19 a.m. CST

    Django might put me off QT

    by HoraceSkinner

    Fights to the death between slaves isn't " gritty realism " its fantasy, like hitler dying in the theater. This looks like a rejected Chappelles show skit turned into a featured film. Idk... Using waltz again so soon doesn't bode well. QT always gets great actors, but this one looks pretty average. & Foxx suxx

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 11:24 a.m. CST

    Also the Kidd...

    by HoraceSkinner

    Its not The Kidd vs AICN ITS ... aint it Kidd news ! Hardly agree w the dude but he posts and posts and posts. A for effort.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 12:08 p.m. CST


    by Stalkeye

    LOL I kinda took a bullet for ya when going after those bullies but the funny part is how I pissed them off so much, that they resulted to stalking my posts in other talkbacks. How funny was that shit? i agreed with what you said and the other guy couldn't handle the truth and wanted you banned forever. Jeez! Glad to have you back in the game as I along with a few others, thought your Banning (D.Vades as well) was uncool and borderline facist especially when some chaps on the threads have posted far worse. No doubt you are one of the coolest guys on this board and if some people can't deal with your honest opinions, then that's their bad/folly. Enuff of the silliness, but yeah I have a feeling that DiCaprio will bring his A-Game in Django and perhaps this role may further propel his career. Shit, QT brought both Travolta and SMJ from the pits of obscurity, so imagine what he can do with Leo. Foxx? Maybe. but contrary to others, his Oscar win for Ray Charles was well deserved. Not anxious to see him as Electro in the sequel to ASM.Not because of his casting but guess who's penning the script? Your Boy, Bobby!(?)! KHHHHAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNN!!

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 12:12 p.m. CST

    My point about Conan was...

    by The Garbage Man

    The people complaining about Django, a former slave embarking on a mission of revenge against the people who destroyed his family and enslaved him, probably love Conan... a movie about a former slave embarking on a mission of revenge against the people who destroyed his family and enslaved him.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 12:39 p.m. CST


    by kataklysmic

    Same worldview. Same page on Django. Preach it brother.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 12:43 p.m. CST

    fluffy ... Sooo wrong

    by HoraceSkinner

    uIts nice to see talk backers posting about heros that are "in the right" killing people. Killing for revenge and / or profitt is very just. Call people immoral for not liking the murderous xslave. Your a tool. The funerals are not even over in conn yet your mind set hadn't changed one bit. Killing is always bad. Always. People who kill are not heros, are not just. QT films normally have no heros. Just villians. Do they make action movies anymore that are not about revenge ?

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 12:56 p.m. CST

    Asi disappears for a spell then comes back and owns this talkback.

    by kindofabigdeal

    I really liked his points on poloitical correctness terms. But my question is what should we call Indians? Their not from India, and as you pointed out anyone born her is technically Native-American. I guess we should either call them by their tribal names or just call them Americans. But I still prefer to call them the "Blacks". (apologies for my racial bones)

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 1:01 p.m. CST


    by the dolphins are in the jacuzzi

    Get over yourself. Nobody here is advocating emulating the "heroes" in these movies and/or shooting up a school. Action movies are escapist fantasy/wish-fulfillment, and they are made to entertain, not to enlighten. And this is nothing new, either. Revenge and violence in entertainment goes back to Shakespeare. And violence in entertainment goes back further than that - it goes back to Beowulf and Gilgamesh, at least, not to mention the Bible. So, get off your high horse and quit being a self-righteous asshole. Besides, the people who are hyped for this movie aren't criticizing Django-haters for being anti-violence; they're criticizing a few select Django-haters for only cheering violence when the "hero" in the movie is white.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 1:28 p.m. CST

    Hmmm, lets see...

    by Todd1700

    A bunch of ridiculous over the top white racist characters serving as little more than a shooting gallery for Jamie Foxx who couldn't act like his dick was on fire even if it really was. A director that hasn't made even a semi decent film in 9 years? No thanks, I'd rather watch flies fuck.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 2:09 p.m. CST

    Most Native Americans prefer to be called Indians nownow

    by D.Vader

    At least, that's what I heard. If its true.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 2:20 p.m. CST

    My Review of "Django"...

    by Hipshot

    DJANGO UNCHAINED (2012) This, the ninth film directed by Quentin Tarantino, and a doozy. In order to discuss this, I have to look at it from two different positions: as a movie separate from cultural context, and then, as a cultural artifact. In a pure sense, Tarantino is a mash-up artist of humongous scholarship and skill. He doesn't make movies about reality, he makes movies about the movies we love, making meta-commentary on the myths we devour and the images that shape our perceptions, especially of the shadow worlds of crime and violence. In PULP FICTION he demonstrated an ability to twist time lines to create moments of tension (remember Butch and his girlfriend on the motorcycle? I thought for sure Jules would jump out and "pop" them...but no, he'd already left the business, if you look at the sequence. Wow.) as well as pull all kinds of bizarre subtexts up to the text level, and give us maps of the inner worlds of these low-lifes that we'd never seen before. A stunning movie, tht somehow created a context in which things I'd never imagine could be enjoyable became hysterically funny (Ving Rhames and the hillbilly. I'm just sayin'...) While DEATH PROOF was nothing other than a C-movie romp, KILL BILL 1 and 2 had an emotional line and impact that I'd never seen coming, and made me start to think about him differently. But it was still about movies, not human reality. INGLORIOUS BASTARDS was fascinatingly misunderstood by many. It wasn't a movie about WW2, but rather a movie about movies about WW2. A hybrid of an art-house film about a Jew seeking vengeance, and a bad WW2 "men on a mission" romp with terrible acting as part of the image system. And the two worlds slowly wound together, getting closer and closer until in one memorable scene, you actually watch Christopher Waltz and Brad Pitt engage in a Bad Acting Contest across a table, and I was in geek heaven. But over under and around the fun, there was something else going on, a righteous indignation that there were cinematic sins that had never been addressed in the Tarantino fashion--bloody vengeance for payback of extraordinary evil. I think he basically asked himself "If I was a Jew, what would I want to see in a movie?" And being the kinda guy he is, that meant watching Jews wrecking havok on the Nazi High Command. And if it didn't happen in the real world, why by God it was going to happen in his. Whatever one thinks of I.B. as a movie, it was audacious as hell, and not quite like anything else I'd seen. We'll get back to that. DJANGO UNCHAINED is a mash-up of several different genres or films, chief among them the Spaghetti "revenge" wester, Blaxploitation, and the "slave plantation" film. Basically, Django is a slave who is trained as a bounty hunter by a German dentist (you have to see it) who seeks to rescue his wife, who has been sold onto a Mississippi plantation. Pretty straight through-line, in some ways a story we've seen a thousand times before. It is played out with verve, beautiful cinematography, some hysterical comedy, and wonderful performances up and down the line (especially when you realize that these people are pieces of movies, not real people.) If I were an alien from another planet, watching film, and Django was slotted into the festival I'd consider it fun, bloody, and better by far than most of the movies it copies. I might put it in the top five Spaghetti westers I've ever seen, just on that count. But there's a bigger issue here. And that is that if you compare films about slavery from the slaves' POV with films about, say, the civil war, or about slavery treating slaves as humans rather than animals, you'll see the extraordinary level of avoidance of this most deeply poisonous aspects of American history. Human history, really, but contrasted with our national myth, it is extraordinary. For an institution that lasted 250 years, followed by another 100 years of Jim Crow and Segregation (which was still alive and well in my youth) to have been documented in dramatic form so infrequently (compare the 5 years of the Civil War. Compare films made about the Holocaust. Hell, compare films about Jewish oppression in Biblical times) suggests a level of avoidance, aversion, guilt and fear that distort the national discourse to this day. You don't depict the rape, torture, and murder necessary to keep a people in bondage. You just don't. And dear God, you don't even imply that there is an unpaid debt in blood. At the end of "Roots" you had the absurd sight of Chicken George refusing to whip the overseer who had tormented his family for decades, a "that would make us no better than him" absurdity on the level of Batman refusing to kill the Joker, even though everyone knows Joker will simply escape Arkham Asylum and kill again. Period. We all know that's an artifact of the Comics Code, and the need to preserve a neat-o villain, but has nothing to do with the real world. And we all understood that Chicken George's action was pure Hollywood Don't Scare The White Folks stuff. Black people aren't like us, the image said. They wouldn't want the kind of revenge we ourselves would seek out. The problem is that we're not different. And therein lies a real, real problem. No payback. No vengeance against the perpetrators. Oh, that's great for the spiritually minded, but a quick glance at world cinema suggests that vengeance is understood just fine by a large enough percentage of the human race to make the omission glaring. That is what happens when one group can control the images used to depict another group. There is no humanity. You don't get the "full spectrum" of human response. You have very low level thugs and sacrificial "buddies" (any Dirty Harry film), and extraordinarily high level (Morgan Freeman can play God), but not the simple arc of growing up, becoming an adult, finding and satisfying sexual needs with honor, falling in love, raising AND PROTECTING family, growing old. The precise arc of human life which is most common, most often presented in film all over the world...the "what will my life be, Daddy?" question, the "how do I become an adult?" question that all world literature answers for its people... Simply doesn't exist in mainstream cinema. I've often commented about the lack of simple human sexuality in successful films with black protagonists (zero percent compared to about 22% for white protagonists in films that earn over 100 million domestic--the basic standard of "success), but there are other gaps, and among them the lack of payback, something so deeply held as a part of American mythology that in such movies as "The Gunfight At O.K. Corral" (which I was just watching last night) it was totally understood that clean-cut Burt Lancaster would throw his lifetime of legal service out the window to avenge a family slight. "He killed my brother." And that motivation--you mess with my family, I'll mess with yours--is understood as more than the Code of the West. It is part of every world culture you can find, anywhere. And blacks in America...well, they kinda got messed with. And I think Tarantino, watching Westerns, realized that black cowboys weren't represented at 1% of their actual statistical existence. They were barely represented in Civil War movies--except in a film like "Glory" where they got vengeance, but had to die at the end for the "sin" of daring to demand to be treated like men. And the cinema audiences bought it, and the Academy rewarded the was as close to a moment of pure humanity as we could get, in that sense. Other films about slavery and its after-effects tip-toed around the horror, from "Amistad" (which was about people on their WAY to slavery), "Beloved" (about people already freed from slavery), "Lincoln" (slaves off stage), "Gone With The Wind" (the most powerful image creator in the entire sub-genre, in which slaves apparently just loved being slaves), "Mandingo" (in which slaves were exotic animals) and so forth. Oddly, one of the very best major films on the subject was the comedy "Skin Game" with James Garner and Lou Gossett (about two con artists, one white and one black)...and it is no mistake that almost half of "Django" deals with a deadly con game. But the basic question at the core of "Django" is a geek cinophile's question: what would have happened if John Shaft, or Superfly, or Dolomite, or John Slaughter had been born a slave? And what if he had awakened to his true nature? In other worlds, what if the Avenging Hero as we understand him: the Rambos, James Bonds, Dirty Harry's, Martin Riggs--the human being who, armed with righteous rage and purpose can (in Shane Black's phrase) "Touch the myth" and become that irresistable force of nature necessary to bring balance to the universe? And who would be crazy enough to make such a film? Gee, I wonder. Tarantino has done something here that just makes me shake my head. I can barely believe it exists, and man oh man, is it in your face. Django starts as a slave, and ends as a mythic hero, the kind we've seen countless thousands of times on the screen. Except...we haven't. We've barely seen anything like this on screen, ever. At least for a generation. Remember: when "Shaft" was remade, they neutered him. We get angelic too-perfect Denzel and Will and Morgan, but no simple testosterone-driven male "thinking animals." You can say all you want about whether these images are important, but I can promise you the audience does. In fact, I don't think you can point to a single week in the history of cinema where where wasn't at least one such image playing in theaters. I submit to you that there is a hunger for them that is incalculably large, and consistent throughout all eras and most cultures--in fact ANY culture that has successfully survived contact with other, aggressive cultures. Don't have that energy? You get wiped the @#$$ out. "Django" intends to correct that. As I said before, it is a big, messy, sprawling, indulgent, violent revenge fantasy that DARES you to disapprove of the target of its violence: slavers. Watch the reactions people have, and you'll very clearly see who empathizes with slaves and abolitionists...and who empathizes with the owners and abusers. Oh my Gawd, the blogosphere has been buzzing with hate, fear, and hysterical joy. This movie plays with cultural images and forbidden archetypes in a way only the most successful filmmakers in the world could manage, or possibly get away with. It is FAR from perfect. I could make a considerable list of things I wish he'd done differently, or better, and yeah, it could have been trimmed by at least ten minutes. But that it exists at all is astounding. A simple story of a man seeking to rescue his wife from monsters. We've seen it countless times. Except this man is black, and the monstrocity underpins the single most persistent and attractive mythology in American history, as measured by GWTW's adjusted box office. Viewed through this lens, it is hard to feel anything other than a kind of awe that this thing exists. There are maybe five filmmakers in the world who could have done it, and the other four didn't want to. A black director would have been too close--he actually would have to have been BETTER than Tarantino to pull this off--all the technical skills, and the writing skills, but sufficiently disconnected to maintain emotional distance...but simultaneously channel a volcano of emotions. Hard to find. I don't know how "good" DJANGO is. I think it is totally of a piece with the rest of Tarantino's oeuvre, but in an odd way more personal than most of his output. The man obviously grew up around black people, and simultaneously has a slight...remove...from the typical flow of human emotions. Is a bit of an "outsider" enough that he sees the human experience through a lens, and therefore doesn't fully associate with either side of this madness. That's apparently what it took to wrap his head around four hundred years of bullshit and come up with something like this. Flawed? You bet. Unique? You bet. Was I hypnotized? You bet. Will I see it again? Ya think? One of the best films of 2012, easily. But boy oh boy, is it not for every taste. Violent as hell, but not a fraction as violent as the institution it deconstructs. As a simple revenge fable, a romance, western, a Tarantino mash-up or a revisionist history that will...ummm...appeal to certain quadrants of the population and utterly appall others, DJANGO UNCHAIN is simply smashing entertainment. Excessive, overlong, self-indulgent...and masterful. A B+ at dead minimum. And in the right mood, virtually singular.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 2:36 p.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    Oh man, i'm so sorry you got into trouble because of me. It's so unjust.Of course, you always been a gentleman, it's expected you wold try to do the right thing, but really, it's too much just for my sake. I don't deserve that. You're the best, man! Well, i think Jamie Foxx should had gottten is oscar for COLLATERAL. I think he did a better ob in that movie then RAY. In Collatera he did a masterclass job of subtle cting and quiet heroism. Everybody praised Tom Cuisebecause he had the showest role, but it was Foxx, as far i'm concerned who truly stole the show. Also, Ruffalo was great.... as usual. Yeah, the new Spider-Man writing team. Oh boy! Why they hired them? Wasn't the first movie dumb enough, is that it? Actually I enjoyed this new Spider-Man movie. I was expecting something far worst, and what i got was a charming honest Spider-Man movie. Whatever uglies that happened in the backstage didn't transpose to the screen. See, i can enjoy reboots even if they are not made by Christopher Nolan. Things were fine, so why change the winning team? Is there no geek franchise this two don' have their hands on? Is there no escape from this guys? Heaven's above! I can't just live from Nolan's movies alone, dammit, i'll starve! Of course i don't like to get banned and it anoys me. But truth be told, i have been partically responsible for it. I can't say that i haven't deserved it a bit, because i have. I have been reading some of my old posts, and i feel ashamed for many of them. Those under my former nicks of BladeRunnerUnit and Memories-Of-Murder are erased, but i can read the reactions, and oh boy! Not the opinions expressed, but the way i done it. The problem is not showing passion, but to do it like a jerkass. It's wrong to treat an intelligent guy like d.vader the same way one would someone one hit wonder post troll, you know what i mean? Even such arch-nemesis like docpazzuzzu i ca't help but sympatise when they finally got fet up, reached the end of their teether and replied in uglies. I'd done the same thing in their position. There's shit i got that i didn't deserve, but there's other that i did. I just hope i'm wise enough now to seperate which is which. Probably i'll fuck up again because i'm an idiot. There is this guy in the latest Abrams Trek 2thread that posted another one of thoe falalcous filled pro-Abrams Trek rants that i'm just aching to reply, bt i have restrained so far because i just can't help but write inanger. All the words that came to m y mind as reply are just furious. Because of how unjust the majority of the pro-Abrams Trek are to the detractors, all this ad homine and strawman fallacies they constantly use again and again and again. You know what i mean? I could respect a pro-Abrams Trek fan, that would be easy, if ot the deviousness they constantly show. Sure ,guys like that are not representative of all, but the complacency of the rest is not doing their side any good. Can't any of the more levelheaded pro-Abrams Trek side call out on this people? You know? Anyway, rant out. Let' have some posting fun, shall we?

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 2:45 p.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    Hello, how are you? Sorry if i can't recall you from the old times, but please, don't be harsh, feel sorry fro an old man. So, what should we call the indians, you ask. Well, we should call them indians. Sure, the respectful thing would be to call them for their own indian nation name, cherokee, apache, navajo, cree, etc. But you know why i support the umbrell term of indian? Because it's also a jab at the whiteys who first call them that. You know how quackers used to be a derrogatory ter but they took to it, co-oped it and used it as a badge of pride? Same thing for the indians. The term indians cam to be beause the first europeans who arrived to the americans believed they were in the Indies so named the natives accordingly to that misconception. I see the term indians not as a negative thing but as a funny historical in-joke that the american indians should be proud to assume as part of their cultural legacy. But to quote from John Ary, those are my though.

  • Django Unchained, the 8th movie from Quentin Tarantino, was better than I expected, but not quite as good as I wanted on a first viewing. As of now, I think Inglorious Bastards (I refuse to learn how to misspell that properly) is possibly QT’s best movie since Pulp Fiction (though I readily admit I still have never seen Jackie Brown), and I may need another viewing of Django to decide which movie I think is best. But right now its Bastards, as that film seemed to be about “something”, and this one works as a crowd-please revenge fantasty (not that there’s anything wrong with that). **Author's note, I do think Bastards is better** I won’t go through a summary of the film as the general plot is known to anyone who has seen the trailers: German bounty hunter Dr. King Schulz frees Django to help him find some bounties that only Django can identify. Schulz teaches Django how to shoot and become a bounty hunter, and along the way he decides to help Django find and free his still enslaved wife. The movie is tense and at times extremely hilarious. There are moments of violence that have you cheering and other moments that have you wincing. Blood erupts from gunshot wounds not like the spewing geysers found in “Kill Bill”, but explodes forth from bodies as if a man’s chest was nothing more than a water balloon filled with red (and this gets huge laughs from the audience at times). Christoph Waltz does a great job as Schulz, Django’s savior and teacher, channeling the charisma of his earlier Hans Landa though infusing him with much more warmth and likability than the former. Leonardo DiCaprio is a hoot as Francophile and plantation owner Calvin Candie, capable of youthful excitability in one scene and furious anger in the next. Kerry Washington is still drop-dead gorgeous, though she doesn’t have much to do here other than cry and hide her emotions. Jamie Foxx, I must admit, did not impress me in the trailers for this film, which I never found that great to begin with (and I admit none of the Bastards’ trailers appealed to me either), but he turns in a wonderfully hardened performance here as the titular character. There’s anger and resentment bubbling behind those eyes of his, but you rarely see it boil over the surface. And Samuel L. Jackson? Hilarious. Just hilarious in his Uncle Ben makeup. I won’t say any more because his performance is best experienced instead of being told about. Tarantino’s soundtracks are often as anticipated as the movies themselves, and I find myself at a loss for how to describe the one QT has chosen for Django. For being his “southern” movie, I’m surprised that Bastards and Kill Bill seemed to have more “western” cues than this one. And for what may be the first time ever, Tarantino put in a few contemporary hip-hop songs and some original songs written specifically for this movie. And when you’re used to Tarantino using old songs or music from other films (and to be sure, Luis Bacalov’s “Django” from the original film is the first song you hear), it was a bit jarring to suddenly hear rap in this pre-Civil War era film. Its not out of place, mind you, just something different from the filmmaker. The standout song for me here is Jim Croce’s “I Got a Name”, which elicited quite a few laughs as it was just completely unexpected. Now all of Tarantino’s movies have moments of pure cinema, those bits that just can’t be achieved or expressed as well through the written word, moments that remind you that “HEY, this is a MOVIE!”. For instance, there’s the scene in Pulp Fiction where Mia Wallace draws the imaginary square onscreen. Bastards, for the most part, feels like a straight story, and Tarantino only gives us this pure cinema moment with the Hugo Stiglitz backstory, giving us a freeze frame, a character title, and a voiceover explaining what happened to him. Some have criticized this moment in Bastards, suggesting Tarantino just couldn’t stop himself from doing something “cool” like that. Thankfully, there isn’t anything close to that in Django. The closest we come is a crawl explaining to us the passage of time, and then a very ominous and dramatic text denoting the next location. But aside from that, there are no Chapters like in Bastards and Kill Bill, no imaginary shapes, no voiceovers, and a very limited use of time-shifting narrative. Now in customary fashion, I give you the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly(Weird): THE GOOD - The acting. Everyone is on the top of their game here. - The violence. When it happens, and you’ll know it when you see it, its glorious and colorful and vivid. And funny too. - The comedy. There’s a particularly hilarious scene with a mob of masked horseman that is gut-bustingly funny. - The cameos. Bruce Dern has a very quick cameo (just in closeup), and he looks like a sleazy 1970s Hollywood producer. Why? I dunno why, but it made me laugh. Franco Nero has a memorable line. Tom Savini’s there without speaking. Amber Tamblyn pops up (as does her father, though I didn’t see him). And this may be Quentin Tarantino’s best cameo yet. I don’t see it ever being topped. - The vengeance. You can’t help but smile every time Django gets back at some evil white man. One scene he engages in some glorious whip-fu. - The gunfights. THE BAD - Clearly a lot was cut from this. I don’t have a lot of bad to say about this film except that you *know* there is more of it somewhere, and we didn’t get it. For instance... - M.C. Gainey as one of the Brittle Brothers that Schultz is searching for. In the trailers we see him and his brothers standing over Django and his wife (jn a presumed flashback). That scene is nowhere to be found in the finished film. And when we meet him in the present, he seems to have Bible pages stapled to his clothes. Why? We never find out (in this cut...) as his scene is too short for my taste. - Jonah Hill. I believe his part was originally offered to Sacha Baron Cohen, but in this finished product, the role is so small that you wonder why it was offered to either one of them in the first place. Is there more footage hiding somewhere? - Walton Goggins. I believe there was originally a role for Kevin Costner as a man who trains DiCaprio’s slaves to fight, and when Costner couldn’t do it, his character was merged with the already cast Walton Goggins. Is there any scene with Goggins training the Mandingos to fight? Is there a reference to him as a trainer? No, not at all... so what gives? THE UGLY (and WEIRD) - The slave abuse. Boy that was hard to watch. Whippings, beatings, eye-gougings, dogs... Even worse knowing this shit actually happened. - The language. If you’re Spike Lee, you might have a big fucking problem with this movie. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a movie with more uses of the “N” word than this one. White people seeing Django on a horse- “Look at this n____!” Slaves seeing Django on a horse- “Who’s that n___?” Samuel L. Jackson seeing Django for the first time- “Who’s this n____ on a nag?!” But hey, that’s how people talked back then. Deal with it. - James Remar. He has dual roles here, though the characters aren’t related (as far as we know), and his second role has no dialogue that I can remember. This isn’t Ugly or bad per se, just weird and a bit distracting. Why did he get two roles? Why him? And how did he appear to lose 7 pounds in his face between portraying the two? - The zooms. In the opening credits and the first minute of the opening scene that follows, I think Tarantino utilizes the extreme zoom lens 5 times. The first two times made me laugh at their absurdity. The last two times had me rolling my eyes, afraid we were going to get this for the entire movie. Thankfully, I didn’t notice a zoom again, and when it was used (like in DiCaprio’s introduction), it was to good effect. - The violence against horses. Poor horses. Funny that the first credit at the end after “Written and Directed by Quentin Tarantino” is the customary “NO HORSE WAS HARMED DURING THE MAKING OF THIS FILM” to make us all feel better. - The One Scene. Okay, usually every Tarantino film has that *one* scene you can point to as being excellent and definitive of the film as a whole. I can’t find it in this. Inglorious Bastards had three scenes I can think of that were masterful examples of building tension: the opening scene, Landa and Shoshanna in the restaurant, and Michael Fassbender in the bar. Those scenes are great at building almost unbearable tension through the dialogue. Is there any scene like that in Django? Not at all. But what Django is good at is a steady build of tension throughout, one that keeps you wondering when everything is going to go wrong and who is going to pay for it when it does. I don’t know if there is that “One Scene” in Django Unchained or not; its not as immediately noticeable as it was in Bastards. But I will say that when Django and Schultz get to Candieland (DiCaprio’s plantation estate) and we’re introduced to Samuel L Jackson’s servant character Stephen, the tension builds and doesn’t relent. If the worst thing I can say about the movie is that I know there’s more than what we saw, and that it did feel like a long film (it clocks in at 2 hours 44 minutes), then you know its gotta be good. Its Tarantino, you either like the guy’s movies at this point or you don’t. The typical Tarantino dialogue is there, but its restrained (Schultz has the most verbose dialogue but QT has other characters poke fun at this), and there’s nothing on par with the diner scene from Death Proof to be sure. Its a movie about righteous revenge with deserved violence in a historical setting and shot like a western. I was very pleased by the end, and I look forward to getting an extended cut in the future. Definitely a crowd pleaser on all levels. I’ll gladly pay to see this again after Christmas. Oh and Samuel L. Jackson? He perhaps gets the most laughs in the movie. And- SLIGHT SPOILER- I can’t say I’ve ever wanted to see him die onscreen until now.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 2:55 p.m. CST

    dolphins are in the jacuzzi

    by AsimovLives

    However, if you see those old shakespeare stories and even all revenge stories up until the 80s, revenge as the sole property of villains. When a hero revenged h would always be called upon i by an wiser character who called attenton to the fact that by oing to route of revenge they were beng o different then the villains hey were after. The heroes of those old stories they either repented from their revenge of they were damned. The morality of revenge is always that if you are a believer in God and the Christian faith, it's not a person's job to right wrongs but God's. This is what the offering the other cheek realy means. To keep righteous even if evil fall upon you, because if you stay true, then evildoers will get their comeuppence, in this life or the next. God is the true judge of men's evil ways. In the 60s and 70s, many movies got made here there was alot of revenge going, but notice those movies made itvery clear this were anti-horoes who were constantly crossing the moral event horizont and in the end they always ended in a personal hell which tey couldn't escape ever again, i not they gt killed themselves as consequence of their actions (like in Get Carter). When in Taxi Driver travis bickle survives, you are supposed to feel fear this lunatic is still around, not happy. Only in the 80s it became popular this weird stupid notin that revenge is not only an acdeptable thing but even a desiable thng and that anyody who embarks in revenge deserves a rosy happy ending. But then again the 80s were fucking weird, the decade of dumb.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 2:59 p.m. CST

    Walter Goggins is this generation's Warren Oates.

    by Smerdyakov

    That's a GOOD thing!

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 3:02 p.m. CST

    @ Asi: I supose Indian is the best term to use. Better than Injun.

    by kindofabigdeal

    As for my name it's fairly new. I got myself banned a while back. I've only joined the talkbacks withing the past couple of years but always relied on AICN for cool geek gossib. Unfortuneately it has gone downhill as of late. I always liked your intelligent take on the topics brought up. Here's looking towards a new year of more interesting takes on future talkback.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 3:03 p.m. CST

    Damn, d.vader! That review was professional!!

    by AsimovLives

    Really, you should be hired by AICN, they would be wise to do so. Damn good job, man. I'm so proud of you.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 3:05 p.m. CST

    Here's to hoping, kindofabigdeal

    by AsimovLives

    Unless i act like an asshole again. Can a man change?

  • And he's the only TB that I see on here on a regular basis.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 3:34 p.m. CST

    Vader go watch Jackie Brown now

    by Samuel Fulmer

    My pick for Tarantino's best film.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 3:36 p.m. CST

    kindofabigdeal, that's because i made a career of getting banned.

    by AsimovLives

    All those different nicks i used in the past to try to elude the watchdogs have done me no good either. I was a fool to think that would work.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 3:36 p.m. CST

    I've seen Djack Reacher for about a month now.

    by BD Mahony

    The D is silent.

  • However, of his movies is the one that has less repeated viewing value to me. It's not the movie, it's me. But damn if Robert Foster doesn't do a man's job with his excelent acting in the movie.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 4:10 p.m. CST



    Sometimes the "J" is silent.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 4:31 p.m. CST

    Django an' see see it

    by migmog

    See what i did there ... the wit is silent

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 5:29 p.m. CST

    I've seen Django Unchained for about 3 years now

    by Avon

  • the girl was chortling so cute at the cleverness of the in-joke of whatever obscure thing and they were talking of how they had purchased these items for each other on past Christmas occasions and.. Awwwwwww. Soooo cuuuuuute. Man I can't wait for this movie. Did you guys see that guy throw that sock filled with shit at that woman on the subway =O? That's one nappy idiot gangster gone excrement-flinging retard right there.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 6:03 p.m. CST

    @hipshot and d.vader

    by Christian Sylvain

    Fuckin great reviews guys. Very insightful Only 5 days left for Django and I can't wait.

  • Tarantino may not ever be able to replicate the freshness of Resevoir Dogs or Pulp Fiction, but if this is in the ballpark of Inglourious Basterds (and it sure sounds like it's going to be at the least) I'll be a damn happy filmfan.

  • One of the characteristics that makes "Blood Diamond" work so well, proveing itself to be an extremely well-written picture, is the character rrevelation that we see in the third act. As long as Connelly's beautiful female journalist/humanitarian is around, DiCaprio's Boer mercenary is on his best behaviour. But once she leaves the picture, watch how well DiCaprio sells the engrained racism of his character. It completely changes the dynamic of the picture and instead of giving us easy answers, takes us on an unexpected journey in which men prove to one another their worth with only their ragged integrity separating them from the pack of violence that snaps at their path. DiCaprio's character I feel truly earns his heroic ending - instead of haveing a sudden change of character, we are able to see his true colours and the depths of his mistrust. When he finds himself faced with the realization that, for all his training and skill (his beloved sense of autocracy informed by an ability to rely on his own capacity for violence), his years of society-induced hatred and racial sense of superiority, and the rage his own cache of acts have fueled him with, he can no longer cover-up the disillusionment he feels and no longer excuse the murderous and greedy acts of the men he's surrounded himself with. This young journalist with her untested idealism and this father who would risk everything merely to be reunited with the son he sees the future in, they revolve around DiCaprio's hardened soldier's realization that he can no longer overlook the consequence of his sins. There is an organic moral awakening that I see in that film, one that is realistically written and seen in all its hurdles and valleys. Despite his uncertain and occasionally flucuateing accent, DiCaprio with that role showed his commitment to playing men whose souls are mysterious to everyone, but especially to themselves - men of a complicated moral quality. I think that is why Scorsese is so attracted to him.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 8:17 p.m. CST

    Thanks D. Vader and Hephesus

    by Hipshot

    Vader's review was a good one.

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 9:08 p.m. CST

    @president baltar, you go man!

    by Anthony Torchia

    And QT needs to stay out of his own fucking movies And that's all I got Peace, out

  • Dec. 20, 2012, 9:16 p.m. CST

    frenetik1 wins the thread

    by ironburl

    Django Fett Uncloned, indeeed.

  • Dec. 21, 2012, 2 a.m. CST

    asimovlives - right on

    by doom master

    PC is just another word for BS. Me personally, I don't tolerate BS, which is why I have no friends anymore.

  • Dec. 21, 2012, 2:03 a.m. CST

    FYI I read somewhere Racists won't go near this movie in public

    by doom master

    It will be like sounding an alarm in the theater...I can't imagine a clansman going to watch this, can you? LOL Maybe they will use it as study materials to support their cause with the KKK establishment...You know - play the dvd to get their point across about how awful black people are. :/ Tarantino does it again...only this time, he's going for BROKE.

  • Dec. 21, 2012, 2:06 a.m. CST

    No Franco Nero as Django no dice.

    by zeroalias

    why even call it Django and use the theme? This is worse than turning James Bond into a poor Spanish bullfighter starring Antonio Bandaras and then casting Sean Connery or Daniel Craig in a bit part as a random bartender...

  • Dec. 21, 2012, 4:06 a.m. CST

    two men who have a bit of disdain for the other right off the bat

    by Gabe Athouse

    The other what?

  • Dec. 21, 2012, 4:14 a.m. CST

    Thanks, there was funny shit on this TB guys!

    by uberfreak

  • Dec. 21, 2012, 8:34 a.m. CST

    Can't wait to see this one!

    by Sirius_crack

  • Dec. 21, 2012, 9:16 a.m. CST

    No Franco Nero as Django?

    by Hipshot

    There were dozens and dozens of "Django" movies. Nero only played the role twice.

  • Dec. 21, 2012, 9:27 a.m. CST

    Django's not a space cowboy/bounty hunter? NO DICE!

    by D.Vader

    Why even call this Django if you're not going to give him his jetpack?

  • Dec. 21, 2012, 10:12 a.m. CST

    Whats this about DiCaprio snubbing Foxx?

    by Darth Macchio

    Hehehe...apparently, DiCaprio was doing some in-character aspects on set prior to filming and, when Foxx arrived and saw him... Foxx said 'Hey Leo...what's up?' And DiCaprio just walked by without even acknowledging him. Which Foxx apparently took offense from...but then I guess criticized him or something for his acting and how it wasn't necessary to be that way or something (i didn't watch the video interview where this was discussed - just read it) now, i could be getting this all wrong given i didn't watch the video nor hear what he said specifically but as an oscar winner, wouldn't he know that some people will often stay in character and act accordingly (even going to the store off the studio lots. or, even more specifically, there are techniques and tactics that help with an actor's motivation and often, building up tension with the real life people can make it easier to have tension between characters. the examples are too numerous to list. most of you would know far better than i the benefits of these techniques. a great example: cameron prevented paul reiser from hanging out with the cast of aliens outside of filming so he'd be a clear outsider to both the actors and the characters they portrayed - no one has to pretend to not like the guy or not accept him. reiser is a nice friendly guy but burke was a selfish prick, etc, etc - brilliant stuff

  • Dec. 21, 2012, 10:38 a.m. CST

    darth macchio

    by Hipshot

    Misunderstandings between actors who use different preparation techniques are legendary. Foxx ain't the first person to react that way, and he won't be the last.

  • Dec. 21, 2012, 11:28 a.m. CST

    by Cobra--Kai

    If I recall on the commentary track for THE TWO TOWERS, Peter Jackson mentions Brad Dourif keeping away from the other actors on set. He then says it was only once he met Dourif again after the shoot was finished that he realized he didnt have a British accent! Dourif had stayed in character as Grima Wormtongue during the whole time he was on set!

  • Dec. 21, 2012, 12:18 p.m. CST

    Asi's right...because we all know the most important thing

    by Baked

    is how white people feel about what minorities choose to call themselves and be called. If only we could see how subtly insulting people are to us! I think we should all reflect upon this profundity with the deep regard it deserves.

  • "about what minorities..." in order to truly capture the heart of his concerns about the problems with modern discourse. But I say this as a devout Buddhist fascist Hare Krishna evangelical...because if you claim to hold an ideological position on the internet, it must be matter how little everything you just said coheres with that.

  • Dec. 21, 2012, 12:40 p.m. CST

    Douriff should have at least one golden baldy at this point

    by Darth Macchio

    He was perfect as Grima even if Grima was quite changed from the book version. That scene where he laments the lack of forces to fight Gondor and Saruman guides him to the balcony to see the thousands and thousands of orcs and half-orcs lines up in formation - you can see a tiny tear leaving Douriff's eye. Of course - given how pretentious the Academy tends to be, Douriff could put in work that shames all other actors that have ever existed but he'd never get a nod at this point cause he was 'Chucky'

  • Dec. 21, 2012, 1:10 p.m. CST

    Christoph Waltz was the only reason I enjoyed Inglourious Basterds

    by Kyle DeMattio

    Well, that and that massive shootouts in the basement and the theater.

  • Dec. 21, 2012, 2:38 p.m. CST

    Proper use of the N-word

    by Hipshot

    is simple: if you have to ask, the answer is "no." Kind if like putting your hand on another man's wife's ass. Because he does it doesn't mean you can. she might smile and say its o.k., just have to have intuition.

  • Someone had to say something.

  • Dec. 22, 2012, 12:43 a.m. CST

    sign me up-saddle me up

    by MJ

  • ...Yaphet Kotto's slimmer older brother?

  • So all of Asi's stuff about the history of the revenge story isn't apt. Slavery was an ongoing enterprise. In 1858 any slaveowner you killed had several more years of oppression still to go. His victims had the absolute and unquestioned moral right to slaughter him like a fucking pig to take those years away from him. As did anybody else who happened along and decided to help. For those of you who want to talk about the school shooter: If you had wandered into that school while the kid was HALFWAY DONE, and you had a shot at him and took it, the question becomes: Moral act or immoral act? Rescue or revenge? Me, I say it's a moral act. And that it isn't an act of revenge, even if you RELISH IT, as you rightly should. You can back that *Wah all killing is wrong even if you're killing people who own slaves* shit right up. And to the guy who chided me because he thinks the movie makes *me* the bad guy because I'm white - don't make me fucking laugh, loser. I don't identify with the villains here even a little. First fucking thing I do with a time machine (even before going after Hitler; I figure somebody else would get HIM) is go help out at Harpers Ferry. Plenty of white guys on the right side there, pal.

  • Dec. 22, 2012, 4:20 p.m. CST


    by Hipshot

    My wife's family was SERIOUSLY in the civil rights movement (Dr. King came to their home) and you are 100% right: the Civil Rights movement, and Abolition movement, could not have been a shadow of what they were without white folks. Period. So the people protesting DJANGO's violence are not seeing slave-owners and traders as a "them." They see these nauseating bastards as an "us." They identify with the owners, not the slaves. And I'm grateful that they are making such a clear, clean distinction. I could never, under any circumstances enjoy a movie about a black man killing innocent people, white or black. But slavers? Fuck them, and the entire society that supported them. My favorite comedy is "Gone With The Wind," and I laugh loudest at the burning of Atlanta.

  • Dec. 24, 2012, 2:30 p.m. CST

    i thought i read that tarantino was quitting..

    by malificus

    ..what's he waiting for? And take that fucking mug-faced Sam fucking overdone hack-ass Jackson with him, it's a toss up which one's face I hate more.

  • Dec. 25, 2012, 2:09 p.m. CST

    I fucking loved it.

    by Kyle

  • Dec. 26, 2012, 1:53 p.m. CST


    by MrLongbaugh

    We both know what happened. Don't start lying and trying to play the victim. Run along.

  • Dec. 29, 2012, 3:33 a.m. CST

    Sharp points, Fluffyunbound

    by GilbertRSmith

    Seeing as there were white slaves, too, and that only a minority of whites ever owned slaves anyways, you'd have to be a fucking idiot with no grasp on history to sympathize with the villains. If every white person owned slaves, then blacks, not whites, would be the racial majority today, unless a dozen whites shared every slave. Whites are not the badguys (hell whites are some of the goodguys), SLAVE OWNERS are the badguys. If you can't wrap your head around that, stop watching movies.

  • Most Natives I know could give two shits about the word "Indian" and are usually called by whatever tribe they belong to though. BLANK-American is largely a safety zone for white people who don't want to get caught using outdated terms like colored and negro.

  • Dec. 29, 2012, 7:36 p.m. CST

    Spot on, fluffy.

    by DocPazuzu

    I tried to make a similar point in the Capone review TB. The same people who call Django "black revenge porn" and get all indignant over the idea of an ex-slave killing slavers (referred to by the same knuckleheads as "whites") are the ones who scream loudest about how moderate muslims should clamp down on the extremists in their midst and would be appalled if a German voiced the same critique of a movie where a Jew killed nazis. Apparently, these rules don't apply within their own ethnic and/or religious group.

  • Dec. 29, 2012, 7:37 p.m. CST


    by DocPazuzu

    The prosecution rests.