- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: My thoughts on Django Unchained *Spoilers*
Posted on 12/26/12 at 11:38 am to Baloo
Posted on 12/26/12 at 11:38 am to Baloo
quote:
I couldn't disagree more with the OP about whether it felt like a Tarantino film. It was extremely Tarantino. If his movies, have one consistent motif, it is that of the history of movies and pop culture overwhelms that of our real world. That's the hyper-real world all his films inhabit.
And in the "film world", mandingo fighting exists, so that's the reality he has built upon. Though I disagree with you about the KKK scene. They bent over backwards to say this was their first time doing this, so there was no Klan. This was the proto-Klan that would later exist in Reconstruction.
Like I said, Tarantino's style was apparent, but not much else.
I get what you're saying about the proto-KKK. They could have been a smaller version of the Reconstruction variant. If there was a part where they said it was their first time, I missed it amongst the constant laughter.
quote:
I found the dinner scene to be incredibly tense, and pretty much the classic QT scene.
Agreed.
quote:
But Stephen's monologue about getting sent to be a slave in the mine was brilliant. It was an argument that slavery was a fate worse than death, and an indictment of America's original sin.
Forgot to mention this in my review. That was an incredibly shot scene. The shifting camera angles were so awesome. I was waiting for him to say the sick things that the Le Quint Dickey plantation did to slaves, but then I realized as it went on that his message was that slavery is much worse than death. That was a very cleverly written scene.
0
Posted on 12/26/12 at 3:46 pm to Carson123987
They were never the KKK.
They were "regulators" which kept slaves in line before the Civil War.
And I think you'll enjoy the movie more when you see it more than once.
His best film since Jackie Brown imo. Probably best since Pulp Fiction.
They were "regulators" which kept slaves in line before the Civil War.
And I think you'll enjoy the movie more when you see it more than once.
His best film since Jackie Brown imo. Probably best since Pulp Fiction.
Posted on 12/26/12 at 4:15 pm to DMagic
quote:
I disagree about the rap. The 2Pac during the shoot out and the RR during the riding scene fit perfectly
I also thought the 2Pac was perfect for that scene.
Did anybody else think Blazing Saddles during the hood/bag scene?
Posted on 12/26/12 at 4:23 pm to BC Tweeker
quote:
I also thought the 2Pac was perfect for that scene.
Loved the 2Pac shootout scene!
Posted on 12/26/12 at 4:49 pm to Carson123987
quote:
I agree. You can tell that QT was pushed to have them in the movie
Not sure if serious.
Posted on 12/26/12 at 4:50 pm to Carson123987
i did not really like it. i may need to see it again
the pacing was bad and the movie was disjointed. it went from overbearing tones about slavery that were so overbearing that it was almost absurdist comedy to absurdist comedy and it just made it seem...silly. way too over the top
lots of tarantinoisms that just seem like a caricature of himself (the most notable being the beer pouring in the first scene in a town). it was lacking in tarantino dialogue, though. the closest was the stupid skull speech that just kept going on and on
sam l jackson's entrance was quite hilarious. it really didn't fit with any part before or after it, but it was funny. the bag scene was so so...i see where they were trying to be funny but it was just forced.
the best way i can describe this movie is it tried to be so many things and didn't do any of them well, and they didn't work well together, so it all kind of fell apart. i'd say this was a person trying to be tarantino, except it kind of fell apart in the end like IB did, so that was tarantino'd a bit
the pacing was bad and the movie was disjointed. it went from overbearing tones about slavery that were so overbearing that it was almost absurdist comedy to absurdist comedy and it just made it seem...silly. way too over the top
lots of tarantinoisms that just seem like a caricature of himself (the most notable being the beer pouring in the first scene in a town). it was lacking in tarantino dialogue, though. the closest was the stupid skull speech that just kept going on and on
sam l jackson's entrance was quite hilarious. it really didn't fit with any part before or after it, but it was funny. the bag scene was so so...i see where they were trying to be funny but it was just forced.
the best way i can describe this movie is it tried to be so many things and didn't do any of them well, and they didn't work well together, so it all kind of fell apart. i'd say this was a person trying to be tarantino, except it kind of fell apart in the end like IB did, so that was tarantino'd a bit
Posted on 12/26/12 at 4:59 pm to Baloo
The movie was and felt like a QT film.
Revenge, poetic justice, and social justice are constant themes in all of Quentin Tarantino's films.
He knows it's something audiences crave to see so it seems he exploits that need more and more in his films.
The movie was very good but I thought Inglorious Basterds was a better overall film (no bias lol).
I look forward to seeing it again when it comes to DVD.
quote:
And I think it's great that Tarantino made an explicit argument that slave owners are the movie equivalent of Nazis: stock villains. Which is about as bad as you get in the movie reality.
Revenge, poetic justice, and social justice are constant themes in all of Quentin Tarantino's films.
He knows it's something audiences crave to see so it seems he exploits that need more and more in his films.
The movie was very good but I thought Inglorious Basterds was a better overall film (no bias lol).
I look forward to seeing it again when it comes to DVD.
Posted on 12/26/12 at 5:47 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
i did not really like it. i may need to see it again
This is the case for every QT movie I have seen in theaters though I enjoyed django on first viewing more then IB, deathproof and kill bill. I found it really entertaining but a few little thing bothered me not enough for me to hate it.
Posted on 12/26/12 at 5:48 pm to Dire Wolf
i didn't hate it. it was relatively entertaining
i just didn't really like it
it was in that 4/10-5/10 range for me on first viewing
i just didn't really like it
it was in that 4/10-5/10 range for me on first viewing
Posted on 12/26/12 at 9:29 pm to gatorhata9
Really, me and my black friends 3 women total managed to not do this. Along with the rest of the theatre of black patrons.
Posted on 12/26/12 at 9:32 pm to bigpetedatiga
Yeah, there were many black people in my theater and I didn't once feel uncomfortable or see any unusual behavior from anyone in the audience.
Posted on 12/26/12 at 9:37 pm to Hugo Stiglitz
I don't get why people said they were uncomfortable. I didn't care. Very relaxed audience when I went.
Posted on 12/26/12 at 9:55 pm to bigpetedatiga
quote:
I don't get why people said they were uncomfortable. I didn't care. Very relaxed audience when I went.
a group of 3 or 4 black girls literally stood up and started cheering and dancing/bouncing around during the 30 second or so part when Rick Ross "100 Black Coffins" started playing. I specifically remember hearing one of them at one point yell out "kill them white bitches".
fortunately though the crowd was well behaved for the most part other than that.
Posted on 12/26/12 at 11:25 pm to Hugo Stiglitz
I wasn't uncomfortable, just annoyed by the hooting and hollering
Posted on 12/26/12 at 11:26 pm to bigpetedatiga
the blood on Leo's hand during the dinner scene was real!
Leonardo DiCaprio cut his hand while the cameras were rolling on the set of "Django Unchained" and kept moving through the scene, never breaking character. His real-life bloodied hand made it into the final version of the film, The Weinstein Company has confirmed with Yahoo! Movies.
"Leo had slammed his hand on the table countless times and he moved his hand further and he crushed a crystal cordial glass," "Django" producer Stacey Sher also recently told Variety. "Blood was dripping down his hand. He never broke character. He kept going. He was in such a zone. It was very intense. He required stitches."
It is this type of dedication that helped earn the 38-year-old actor a Golden Globe nomination and Oscar buzz for playing an evil slave plantation owner.
LINK
Leonardo DiCaprio cut his hand while the cameras were rolling on the set of "Django Unchained" and kept moving through the scene, never breaking character. His real-life bloodied hand made it into the final version of the film, The Weinstein Company has confirmed with Yahoo! Movies.
"Leo had slammed his hand on the table countless times and he moved his hand further and he crushed a crystal cordial glass," "Django" producer Stacey Sher also recently told Variety. "Blood was dripping down his hand. He never broke character. He kept going. He was in such a zone. It was very intense. He required stitches."
It is this type of dedication that helped earn the 38-year-old actor a Golden Globe nomination and Oscar buzz for playing an evil slave plantation owner.
LINK
This post was edited on 12/26/12 at 11:30 pm
Posted on 12/27/12 at 12:35 am to Weebie
All I can say is I just watched it with my some friends of mine and shite was easily one of the best movies I've ever seen.
Posted on 12/27/12 at 12:43 am to Weebie
That is awesome
Posted on 12/27/12 at 12:51 am to Hugo Stiglitz
I find this almost impossible to believe.
Posted on 12/27/12 at 12:59 am to bomber77
View on the Django/King dynamic
quote:
The charater wasn't supposed to be top notch yet. He had the desire, he had the need to reach his goal, but he hadn't been hardened enough in the part of slave turned free man with free will yet. Schultz had to die, to not be there to guide him any longer in order for him to stand up and say "I can do this". He was strting to - he held up under Candie's pressure better than Schultz because he knew the other side of that lifestyle. But he had not yet had to face the fight on his own. He HAD to have that point of no return, and he could ONLY do that without Schultz. That forced him to realize - this is your goal, this is your life YOU are in charge. He wasn't supposed to be charismatic. He was apupil who was suddenly turned out and forced to realize what he knew all along - that he was a man in his own right.
Posted on 12/27/12 at 1:06 am to Rittdog
Ritt, you've put in solid work in these threads. Glad to see someone love Tarantino as much as I do
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News