Page 7 of 8 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >
Topic Options
#601650 - 12/21/12 05:37 PM Re: tarantino's django unchained [Re: Allen Montgomery]
madget Offline
Member

Registered: 05/11/01
Posts: 4870
What exactly is your objection? That you think more impressionable people than yourself will start believing a hot blonde French girl killed Hitler and pre-emptively ended the whole war? Did you see the movie itself? How postmodern does one have to get before the onus of understanding a wink and a nudge is upon the audience?

And how boring does storytelling become if we're not allowed to ask "what if" and see where imagination can take us? (For the record, Abe Lincoln was not *really* a vampire hunter.)

Hitler's more drastic comeuppance in IB works as the catharsis it's intended to be, at least it did for me. It might've been silly in a lesser movie but IB was very intelligently crafted and knew how to pack a punch.

I'm not exactly sure how I feel about the notable resurgence of "revenge" as a major end-of-itself theme in film generally. It's a bit one-note and has been a major element -- and in some cases the driving force -- behind every QT film since JB. But it can certainly be a thrilling fantasy in deft hands, and I don't really analyze film through a moral lens. Because I'm dead inside and don't really care. I'm more concerned with what's interesting and sophisticated and effective, intellectually and aesthetically speaking.

Slightly more interesting is the current debate about Zero Dark Thirty, which illustrates torture as having produced evidence that led to the assassination of Osama Bin Laden, which according to many officials contradicts the political reality.

K

Top
#601651 - 12/21/12 05:40 PM Re: tarantino's django unchained [Re: madget]
madget Offline
Member

Registered: 05/11/01
Posts: 4870
Incidentally did anyone else catch QT's recent interview with Howard Stern, who confronted him about the whole toe-sucking e-mail scandal that hit the net during DU's production?

K

Top
#601652 - 12/21/12 07:34 PM Re: tarantino's django unchained [Re: madget]
Allen Montgomery Online   content
Member

Registered: 05/08/00
Posts: 7071
Originally Posted By: madget
What exactly is your objection? That you think more impressionable people than yourself will start believing a hot blonde French girl killed Hitler and pre-emptively ended the whole war?

Do some people actually believe that lemmings commit mass suicide by leaping off cliffs? Has the textbook definition of the word "lemming" come to include that connotation? But do they really? Or was that simply the result of an over-zealous camera crew filming a Disney nature documentary?


Originally Posted By: madget
And how boring does storytelling become if we're not allowed to ask "what if" and see where imagination can take us?

So make up something from whole cloth. Anyway, I find true history more interesting than fantasy.


Originally Posted By: madget
Slightly more interesting is the current debate about Zero Dark Thirty, which illustrates torture as having produced evidence that led to the assassination of Osama Bin Laden, which according to many officials contradicts the political reality.

Kathryn Bigelow. Need any more be said.
_________________________
"The trouble with being a ghost writer or artist is that you must remain anonymous without credit.
If one wants the credit, one has to cease being a ghost and become a leader or innovator."
Bob Kane

Top
#601656 - 12/22/12 01:37 PM Re: tarantino's django unchained [Re: madget]
Charles Reece Offline
Member

Registered: 08/18/99
Posts: 10013
Loc: us of fuckin' a
Originally Posted By: madget
Incidentally did anyone else catch QT's recent interview with Howard Stern, who confronted him about the whole toe-sucking e-mail scandal that hit the net during DU's production?


yep, a bit of a beard:

_________________________
The Gospel, wherein much Truth is written.

Top
#601658 - 12/22/12 04:36 PM Re: tarantino's django unchained [Re: Charles Reece]
madget Offline
Member

Registered: 05/11/01
Posts: 4870
I couldn't help but feel he just threw that on to sorta stick it back to her. I don't remember the details at this point, but I know her write-up about him was far from flattering.

I was surprised that part of the discussion got as far as it did, given how clearly QT didn't want to go into it. My favorite bit though:

HS: "Did she have nice feet, at least?"
QT: "Eh ... not really."

K

Top
#601661 - 12/26/12 09:52 PM Re: tarantino's django unchained [Re: madget]
madget Offline
Member

Registered: 05/11/01
Posts: 4870
(Spoilers) Sad as I am to do so, I have to agree with Charles. DU was pretty disappointing. It is surprisingly straightforward -- no chapters, no shuffling of chronology, no intertwining stories -- and character development and opportunities to provide content are too often traded out for laying an arbitrary song down and showing nothing-much-happening. The pacing is awkward and even the most interesting scenes -- say the one where Candie discovers the duo's ploy -- make little sense in the specifics of how they play out.

Perhaps more central yet to the movie's ineffectiveness is the fact that at no point are we given any particular reason to like Django himself. As protagonists go, he's a bit of a dud, to the extent that QT feels the need to awkwardly stop the action at one point to have the Schultz character remind us, through a needless bit of exposition, that Django isn't really an asshole, just pretending, as instructed. We knew this, but it's as if QT didn't have faith the audience was on the same page -- it felt to me like something added during filming, because of how ineffectually characterized Django still is at that point. And if Django is a dud, it's doubly true of his absolutely non-developed cipher of a wife he has set out to rescue. Given the nature of their predicament, historically and narratively, it's almost impressive how little QT managed to get me to care about their plight. The excitement ends up stemming more from a desire to see the relatively cartoonish slavers get their comeuppance, which they do -- but even that somehow fails to be as satisfying or well-executed as one might hope. There's at least one pretty terrific shoot-out, but the overall trajectory and resolution of the various action bits was somehow unsatisfying to me.

Dr. King Schultz is a much more enjoyable character than the pair he is assisting, but that's more by dint of Waltz's natural charisma than anything: the character himself doesn't really make a whole lot of sense.

What I did like: I normally can't stand DiCaprio, but I thought he did a fine job as Candie. Samuel Jackson was really terrific as well, and the relationship between those two characters was loaded with all kinds of interesting potential. But like most things in the movie, it wasn't delivered on to the degree I thought it would be, given a near 3-hr running time.

The movie also boasts QT's own most insufferably awful cameo yet. It's cute that he blows himself up, as if joking with the audience that he realizes his sudden presence isn't welcome -- but alternatively, he could have just left himself out of it.

DU is definitely at or near the bottom of my list as far as QT's movies go. It had a lot of potential but so much of that potential felt either half-baked, or all together squandered.

K

Top
#601662 - 12/26/12 10:36 PM Re: tarantino's django unchained [Re: Charles Reece]
MBunge Offline
Member

Registered: 07/19/01
Posts: 3386
Loc: Waterloo, Iowa, United States
I haven't seen it yet. May decide between Django and Miz this weekend. All I needed to see, however, was that Django was 165 minutes long to know it would be problematic at best. 2 hours and 45 minutes + a director whose worst flaw is never knowing when to say enough = trouble.

Mike

Top
#601664 - 12/27/12 11:51 AM Re: tarantino's django unchained [Re: MBunge]
Charles Reece Offline
Member

Registered: 08/18/99
Posts: 10013
Loc: us of fuckin' a
"The movie also boasts QT's own most insufferably awful cameo yet."

That's what I've been telling everyone, too. I believe he has 2 cameos: the unmasked proto-klansman sounded like him. I truly hated that scene. It was so fucking flat and just kept going on. And nothing gets my hatred flowing like Jonah Hill.
_________________________
The Gospel, wherein much Truth is written.

Top
#601668 - 12/27/12 08:12 PM Re: tarantino's django unchained [Re: Charles Reece]
madget Offline
Member

Registered: 05/11/01
Posts: 4870
Ah, right, I'd forgotten about that. I agree, it seemed to me that was QT also. Even hooded, he somehow sticks out like a sore thumb.

And I agree about the scene, too. It was too slapsticky, suddenly shifting gears into the equivalent of an SNL sketch. Of all the rich situational things QT could've done with a run-in with the Klan -- that's what he settled on? I understand the satisfaction of demystifying them, but the bit about so-and-so's wife doing a shitty job with the eyeholes should've been a small, quick joke in the midst of something more fundamentally interesting, not the centerpiece of a scene where the heroes are forced to abandon their iconic carriage.

K

Top
#601741 - 01/08/13 11:04 AM Re: tarantino's django unchained [Re: madget]
Charles Reece Offline
Member

Registered: 08/18/99
Posts: 10013
Loc: us of fuckin' a
_________________________
The Gospel, wherein much Truth is written.

Top
Page 7 of 8 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >


Moderator:  Rick Veitch, Steve Conley