[quote=“JonathanCorbett, post:140, topic:560”]Not very constructed to my way of thinking.
It’s clear the ghost has a physical consistency, since he kills his enemies… shooting.
But Django IS a ghost: among other things in the original version his last words - when Rada Rassimov tells him “what a lot of dollars, they 'll be enough for a life” - are “I already had a life”. Then he vanishes into thin air.[/quote]
A typical sentence which is open for interpretation. It could also be a statement about a “lost” life in the sense of a wasted life.
I prefer the film not to be palpable. To keep it in abeyance.
At the end he obviously just sprints inside (or behind) one of the buildings when there is like 10-11 seconds where the audience can’t see him and the woman isn’t looking at him.
I’ve just finished this and I thought it was great. Very stilysh direction filled with great images and atmosphere. Probably the best fake Django movie.
I don’t think we’re supposed to actually know whether he’s a ghost or not but just wonder. I believe this was a technique the writers and director used to make the movie stand out and be interesting regardless the low budget it had.
I’ve seen it from the Argentinian DSX DVD and it has great image quality. It’s the American cut and lasts 94 minutes.
I think he’s more of a fallen angel than a ghost. He definitely has supernatural qualities, but he’s also vulnerable. Either a human with supernatural powers or a supernatural with some human limitations.
But again, he does nothing that couldn’t have been done by any other SW hero. And there ain’t one scene or shot which shows anything real supernatural. Therefore definitely not definitely.
Maybe not “definitely” supernatural, but “probably” supernatural. He does disappear half a dozen times. Its possible to do, but extremely difficult for a human to do that. You have to time it just right so that when the person looks away you quickly and silently escape before he looks back. Again, I lean more towards supernatural because there is no reason for him to do that otherwise. He’s also seemingly impervious to bullets during the first revenge kill, although maybe the dude just has bad aim. Possible but improbable. In my review on fistful of pasta I offered the interpretation that his powers are in his gun. When his gun is taken away from him he seemingly becomes a vulnerable human again. When he gains it back, he returns to supernatural form.
The same debate exists for Sartana. Many think Garko’s character got supernatural powers. In this case I happen to just think hes a very good illusionist, like a David Copperfield or something like that.
Steffen in DJANGO IL BASTARDO is definitely supernatural in my opinion. I like the Colonel’s take on the character!
I believe Garrone has stated in the past that the character is a ghost. Since he was the director and co-writer…I think he might have an inkling as to the nature of the character in his film. But, then again…the character could have been drawn intentionally vague, just so people like us would have something to discuss.
As for Sartana…that is definitely open to debate. Personally, from reading and hearing interviews with Garko and Parolini, I believe he is a supernatural being.
But, the character also has elements taken from Mandrake the Magician, so the illusionist theory fits in, too. So…perhaps Sartana is a supernatural illusionist!
Nice theory about his gun, didn’t realize that but makes sense.
As I said, I do believe it’s intentionally vague, but there are scenes where you can’t really explain how he appears/disappears like the one where one of the guys looking for him sees his partner dead with the money on his hand and when he leans over to get the money it’s actually Django.
I think that vagueness is what makes this movie interesting and stand out against many other low budget SW. If it would’ve had an explicit explanation either supernatural or real a lot of tension would’ve been lost and the movie would’ve been more average.
Among other things we have repeated, inexplicable apparitions/disappearances, the doubling of his image, a white blood stain on the wooden outside wall and even a manifest transformation (!) in the avidity/greed scene inside the barn…
I will have a closer look at all these things, if I re-watch it one day, but I don’t remember anything obviously supernatural.
Well, before I read about all these theories I even hadn’t given a thought to it when I watched it first. Maybe I was very, very inattentive.
You must have been, because - while it is open to interpretation - the possibility of Django the Bastard being not quite of this world is definatly there.
I believe he made him bleed so it wasn’t obvious. He’s not clearly a ghost but he’s not clearly a normal human either. I think everything is intentionally vague either way so you can’t say for sure whether he’s a ghost or not. I think anybody who says that Django is a ghost is just as wrong as anybody who says he isn’t. There’s no way to tell, at least not from what we see in the movie.
Has there ever been a discussion here (I’m sure there has) about whether or not anyone thinks “High Plains Drifter” took quite a bit from “Django the Bastard”?
There’s also another SW I saw recently where there is a major fire at the end, similat to HPD - title escapes me at the moment (and I don’t mean “Fistful of Dollars”) -
Maybe “Drifter” isn’t as original as it’s made out to be in certain circles - any thoughts?
.
