Slow Poke Movie Reviews: Django Unchained

The Walrus Moose has fake news, but real movie reviews. This is one of those reviews.

-

Quentin Tarantino has made ridiculous films in the past, and he will most likely continue to make them in the future. Not saying that his films aren't entertaining, just saying that they're ridiculous in their content and embellishment of past film genres or historical time periods. "Django" is one of the films that I wasn't sure what the hell to think after seeing it. I've seen Tarantino's crazy blood before in films like "Kill Bill Vol. 1" and "Kill Bill Vol. 2":; I've heard witty dialogue before in "Pulp Fiction"; I've seen historical bends in "Inglourious Basterds." Tarantino blends all of these into "Django Unchained," but the film just didn't hit me as a hit. It felt more like a director just putting a bunch of stuff he loves on the screen and expects that viewers who liked his stuff are going to give him a pass and will make the requisite connections that turn this movie into a genius film. Whoa, whoa, whoa. Take a step back there, cowboy. More on this in a few paragraphs.

Google Image Search for "Django Unchained script"

Meet Dr. King Schultz, played very smoothly by Academy Award winner Christoph Waltz, a former dentist in his home country of Germany, but is now a bounty hunter in late 1850's Antebellum American South. His quest to find a trio of outlaw brothers leads him to fortuitously encounter the film's title character Django (Jaime Foxx). The film's early encounter with these two characters basically gives you an idea about how bloody the film will be moving forward. How crazy messy is the blood violence? Well, if horses had councils about film portrayals showing indignities in movie horse deaths they would likely have sued The Godfather and Django Unchained. Anyhow, Schultz teaches Django the ropes of the bounty hunting business and it's all about getting good at your craft during the final parts of the first act. Admittedly, the first act is pretty cool. The two characters are learning from one another and they grow close enough to have Django reveal that his wife, Broomhilda, was taken by the outlaw trio previously mentioned. Yep, Broomhilda. When Dr. Schultz (being of German origin) describes the fairy tale of Broomhilda and her savior's quest to go through a fire-breathing dragon and Hell fire to Django the plot thickens and if the film had continued with this notion (which it kind of does) then I would have been cool with that.

However, we moved into the second and third acts where a lot of racial inequalities come into play more heavily, and the movie (kind of) moves away from a fairy tale story of a hero trying to save his wife and into a movie (sort of) telling me that each plantation owner is bad that Django is here to bring swift justice. And justice he brings. Bang, blam, boom, kaboom. I have no problem with this either, surprisingly. What would a Tarantino film be without gratuitous bloodlust and gallons of blood, right? The second act kind of brings it, but the third act definitely brings it, despite a lot of sitting on horses and around dining table.

The reason I keep writing things like (sort of) and (kind of) is due to the movie really throwing a lot of ideas on the screen and it's difficult to discern what message, if any, I should take away. Is this all a farce playing on a shameful American past (sort of), is it an honest portrayal of the America's shameful actions regarding slavery (kind of), is it a movie that a viewer is not supposed to take anything away from except enjoy him or herself (yeah, sure). What is it? Why is the movie so long? Where was the editor to say "You know what, fuck this shit. This is stupid and I need to really get a handle on this before it all gets out of whack"? This is a reason for Director's Cuts on DVD extras, or Extended Versions. Where the hell do some of these character arcs come from? What the hell is wrong with Tarantino and his selection of music (old west style homages, Rick Ross, John Legend, 2pac, Johnny Cash)? It's very tonal uneven. How can I appreciate something if it's just a bunch of stuff thrown onto a screen?

Google Image Search for "Django Unchained Drawing"

So, I go back to the question posed earlier: are viewers supposed to just give Tarantino a pass and make their own Cloud Atlas connections to these characters to help make sense of it all? That's stupid and that's a waste of anyone's brain power, if this is the case.

As far as blood violence goes...dude, I get it -- you love showing violence on screen. I love what's been done before with folks like the Crazy 88 at the Charlie Brown club in Kill Bill Vol. 1 getting decapitated, losing limbs and bleeding like fountains. I laughed my ass off when Marvin gets hit in the head because Jules "must have gone over a bump, or something" in Pulp Fiction. But when I'm seeing the same dead bodies get repeatedly shot with the same slow motion effects done twice or thrice in the same scene, then it all gets old.

As far as acting goes, Leonardo DiCaprio is fantastic, Samuel L. Jackson is great, and Christoph Waltz does a mighty fine job! Everyone else is kind just average.

Overall, Tarantino's film just feels like the director saying "Hey, look at me and look what I can do. Take that mainstream studios! No one can tell me to reign it in at all, because everyone loves my movies!" I wasn't sure how to feel at the end when all things were said and done, and I kind of still don't. I didn't know whether I should laugh, feel disgusted, or just wash it all away. And, don't get me wrong, it's not a bad movie at all, I just feel it has a ton of ideas that aren't as polished as some of Tarantino's other films.

-

TL;DR - If you like watching your niece/nephew/son/daughter's elementary school Christmas pageant complete with terrible singing, some skits, and at a run time of an hour that feels more like two hours, then you'll probably really enjoy Django. Why? Because you love your niece/nephew/son or daughter and no matter what they do or however long they might do something for, it doesn't make you feel indifferent about this love.

-

Highs: Some very great performances from DiCaprio, Jackson and Waltz.

Lows: Am I supposed to laugh at this scene? Uh...dude, you're losing me here a bit.

Rating: See it on Netflix, so you can turn it off if it doesn't suit you.