DJANGO UNCHAINED First of all let me say I am no Quentin Tarantino fan. I think most all of his films juvenile and silly. So Im saying that going in. So I didnt expect much going in. But I was really surprised at the first half of the film. Yes the way they operated would have gotten them killed early and often. They’d have never made it far the way they worked, not at all. They’d have been quickly killed. But the film was a throwback to 1960 Westerns, and for about the first half of it the thing was actually quite enjoyable. It reined me of an old cowboy film I once saw with James Brown (the name of which I can’t recall at the moment) and I thought that was the way the film would go. I’d give the first half or so of the film about a 3 1/2, maybe even a 4. But then the whole film changed. (Is this a new trend in filmmaking, because the same thing happened with the Great Gatsby?) At some point about half way along it became an incredibly boring and draggy film and not long after that it degenerated into complete sow-crap. The last half isn’t even really worth commenting on much except to say that the last few gunfights were absolutely ridiculous, the gunplay (as well as the guns themselves) was so unbelievable it was idiotic, and you don’t shoot a man and a freaking goat-full of blood erupts out of him. I give the last half of the film which was, even with the silly and childish gun play a real yawner a 2. Maybe a 1. It was his typical kung-fu crap (what was it called, Kill Bill?) just with guns. You know this could have been a really interesting, even a good film. He did a very good job of tying the South and the West together (and anyone who knows anything about history knows there wouldn’t have been a West as we know it without the South), at first it had a tribute Western feel, and aside from the silly way they operated as bounty-hunters it would have addressed some really interesting issues. For instance there was a young black boy who you could tell was really angry (I don’t think I’d have lived long as a slave either, it would have angered me) and you could see it in his eyes. That character could have done some interesting things as a secondary character. Know what Tarantino had him do? Sit in the back of a prison wagon with the door open and just pathetically smile as Django rode off. Didn’t even have the kid step out of the wagon or even try to pursue his own freedom. The film was nothing but stereotypical claptrap and cardboard characters the whole last half through. As I said the first half was okay and it could have went in a very good direction, but then it degenerated into a typical (as well as stereotypical) juvenile Quentin Tarantino vengeance laced teenagery blood-fest. The kind of film made by a guy who strikes me as an outcast as a kid (or at least likes to think of himself that way) and can’t wait to get back at everyone by showing how much of a... whatever the hell he thinks he’s become when he finally grew up. Only trouble is, he never actually grew up. He’s still that teenage outcast and can’t let it go in his own mind. The last half of the film had the dubious depth of a dried out Mississippi muckhole. That’s what you get when you have child-minded political-populists making films and writing scripts, instead of grown men and women making accurate and valid observations about real life. (I think what this guy actually knows about real life he got entirely from the movies. Bad, B-grade movies.) Anywho I’ll give it a 3 out of 5, and that’s being pretty generous considering that the historical inaccuracies (language, guns, behavior) were so gaping you could have flown a cargo plane through it. (It’d be as if I took modern Detroit street-lingo and tried to put in in the mouths of a British sailing frigate crew. It was that silly and that contrived.) I don’t recommend it. Well, I don’t recommend the second half of it certainly.
Posted on: Sun, 13 Apr 2014 04:07:34 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015