MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Review-ish: Django Unchained

(NSFW image  – which is why I didn’t just put it on top of the review – that likely inspired a scene in Django)

I don’t think I have a ton to add to the conversation about Django Unchained.

It is not a special film. It feels a lot like Tarantino playing out a contract. (No, there is no contract to which I am referring.) Or maybe someone with some real talent, but with no real ambition beyond imitating Tarantino.

It has laughs. It has a ton of violence. It has well over 100 uses of the word “nigger.”

I’d sit through it again and not suffer. But if I don’t, I don’t think I’ll be missing anything of note.

But for me, it was missing the curve ball that makes Tarantino interesting, even in his lesser works. It’s a 2 or 3 joke film. And those jokes repeat over and over and over again. Most of the audience seemed fine with that. I found myself oddly bored in a film that is so relentlessly in the audience’s face… perhaps the most aggressive piece Tarantino has ever made, even more so than the Kill Bills.

The tech side is excellent. No complaints. Robert Richardson is still a master. Acting performances are also uniformly strong. But I preferred the character Chris Waltz plays the first time I saw Robert Culp & Bill Cosby doing that schtick on “I Spy.”

The only exceptional element in this film, for me, was Samuel L. Jackson who is transformed into Uncle Ben – I mean, right off that old box – to the point where his head seems to be another shape. And he balances attitude and rage and a surface calm in the one thing in this film that seriously deserves Oscar consideration.

For a movie I didn’t love (and certainly didn’t hate), I didn’t mind the looooong running time. But the film lives on a hamster wheel of repetition that I wish someone had been able to get Tarantino to cut down. And really, I wish there was a point. Comparisons to Inglorious Basterds make no sense to me, as there were a load of interesting, subversive ideas in Inglorious Basterds. I can’t think of a single one in this film. And a love story? It’s a long story like Eraser is a love story.

I look at the trailer and TV spots and I see what this film was meant to be… good, fun, mostly brainless pulp. But it hangs around so long that the failure of QT to find anything to say becomes all too apparent.

I could pick the thing apart, but that would be silly. It’s not that kind of movie. Either you get on the ride and give yourself to it or not. That doesn’t mean that the film has no responsibility to entertain, but it does try. It literal pulls down its pants… or Jamie Foxx’s… and like so much in the film, it leads nowhere… except for a cool moment out of context.

This is the first Tarantino film that could have been made by Robert Rodriguez. Good or bad. You make that call.

11 Responses to “Review-ish: Django Unchained”

  1. spassky says:

    WTF where is that NSFW photo from???

    (Besides the bathroom at Johnny Rockets)

  2. Think says:

    “This is the first Tarantino film that could have been made by Robert Rodriguez. Good or bad. You make that call.”

    This is the most bullshit statement I’ve read in a long time. Rodriguez has never composed an image or constructed a scene that touches anything in this movie. This is the work of a master. Rodriguez is a B-movie mediocrity. I feel like you have no grasp of filmmaking if you can’t see or feel the difference here.

  3. StellaPD says:

    So QT diehards are going to become completely unhinged by any review that doesn’t proclaim Django a masterpiece?

  4. Sam says:

    David: Surprised not to see a dissection of the BFCA noms, which I believe you vote for, right?

  5. Big G says:

    So I guess someone might be calling bullshit if DiCaprio wins the Supporting Actor Oscar. I mean Poland doesn’t even mention him.

    And I wonder is Spike Lee will be going apeshit on QT yet again for that word being used 100 times.

  6. Joe Leydon says:

    It would appear David and that other fellow are vastly outnumbered. For now.

  7. Breedlove says:

    Lex posted something on Elsewhere that I felt like I could have written myself word for word, and almost posted here earlier today. Fair or unfair, I have a strong dislike for Kerry Washington, mainly because of seeing her on Bill Maher. She comes across as this super uptight, humorless, wannabe intellectual…I found her so painful on that show a couple times that I wish they got someone else for this flick…

  8. Big G says:

    Well, if you read that Owen Glieberman review in EW he and David are actually in total agreement.

  9. christian says:

    Lex only likes white women. End of his insight.

  10. Hendhogan says:

    I am greatly looking forward to the Asylum version: “Jdango Unroped.”

Leave a Reply

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

“There are critics who see their job as to be on the side of the artist, or in a state of imaginative sympathy or alliance with the artist. I think it’s important for a critic to be populist in the sense that we’re on the side of the public. I think one of the reasons is, frankly, capitalism. Whether you’re talking about restaurants or you’re talking about movies, you’re talking about large-scale commercial enterprises that are trying to sell themselves and market themselves and publicize themselves. A critic is, in a way, offering consumer advice. I think it’s very, very important in a time where everything is commercialized, commodified, and branded, where advertising is constantly bleeding into other forms of discourse, for there to be an independent voice kind of speaking to—and to some extent on behalf of—the public.”
~ A. O. Scott On One Role Of The Critic

“Every night, we’d sit and talk for a long, long time and talk about the process and I knew he was very, very intrigued about what could be happening. Then of course, one of the fascinating things he told me about was how he had readers who were reading for him that never knew it was Stanley Kubrick. So if he heard of a novel, he would send it out to people. I think he did it through newspaper ads at the time. And he would send it out to people and ask for a kind of synopsis or a critique of the novel. And he would read those. And it was done anonymously. But he said there were housewives and there were barristers and all sorts of people doing that. And I thought, yeah, that’s a really good way to open up the possibilities. Because otherwise, you’re randomly looking, walking through a bookstore or an airport. I said, “How many people are doing this?” It was about 30 people.”
~ George Miller’s Conversations With Kubrick