thin line you walking on, I’d say. as Tarantino compares slavery of the blacks and distortion of the indians to the holocaust, it’d be very difficult to have jews in KZ clothes as action figures of Schindler’s List. So I see the point… Still, it’s just a film.
Didn’t watch this movie, don’t like Tarantino’s stuff.
I can admit slavery was not okay, but to keep bringing it up like this is ridiculous. Then even have the gall to make a movie about butchering my ancestors? No. Not a western in my book.
I’ve also lost all respect (If I even had any) for Jamie Foxx because of his little SNL bit “I get to kill all the white people, isn’t that great?”.
I’ll stick to Italo-westerns and good ol’ classics.
1 Like
[quote=“rowdyJ0E, post:322, topic:2720”]Didn’t watch this movie, don’t like Tarantino’s stuff.
I’ll stick to Italo-westerns…[/quote]
…where people of all races are treated fair & evenly :-\
I just had the pleasure of seeing this last night. Great flick! Not without it’s flaws though. Some of the music seemed a bit out of place (Rick Ross/Jim Croce). Christopher Waltz’s performance was stellar (which is stating the obvious). Watching QT’s fat ass get blown up was quite the unexpected bonus.
I agree, Spike uses the n word liberally in all his films and in his personal life. And now QT starts doing it and suddenly its not okay? Just because your black, doesn’t mean its okay to say the word. As Samuel L. Jackson says himself in Coach Carter: " It matters not that one black man is saying it to another. That was a word used by the slave owners to demean our ancestors. When you speak that word you are continuing that denigration."
ANd don’t forget Spike Lee created Jewish Stereotypes in Mo Better blues, talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
Is that really Edda dell’Orso on the vocal from “His Name Was King”, by the way? I’ve never heard her sing lyrics before, let alone sound so American.
Isn’t it Ann Collin?
That’s what I thought.
A quick google search suggests that it is. The reason I asked is that it’s credited as Edda dell’Orso on the Django Unchained soundtrack CD.
[size=14pt][/size]I did notice that at the beginning of this film it states, 1858, two years before the american civil war. WOts that all about, the civil war started in april 1861!!! Anyway just watched it again tonight on download from tinternet, and enjoyed it just as much.[size=14pt][/size]
I think it’s intentional anachronism, I’m sure many goofs made in the film are purposefully included.
Hitler died by him a year earlier, maybe he has a different time metering.
Or more simply the film starts in December 1858… 
yes but the film states that 1858 is two years before the start of the civil war. anyway, of no real significance. I still liked the film but it was chris welch (however you spell it) that made it for me,like he did in Inglorious Basterds.
Waltz, just like the dance.
To my own surprise, after all the things I had read about DU, I think it is QTs weakest film so far.
It is much weaker than IB, with which it shares a lot of his narrative structure, it is far less brilliant than IB or Death Proof (which is excellent), in fact it does not contain very much really great stuff. The long middle part on Candyland, in short all the Di Caprio stuff, is pretty strong.
Foxx is a good lead, and his laconic alliance with the ever talking Waltz, who gives again a find but less great than in IB performance, works well enough. And di Caprio is great, while Jackson has great role on his side.
But I really did not like the splatter aspect of the violence, nor do I think that the general handling of the action in DU is well done. But the most disappointing aspect was that he characterized nearly all the secondary characters as ugly white trash caricatures, which destroyed half of the scenes. The ending is also not convincing.
I don’t know, it had the potential for another classic, but QT has spoiled it. 7/10
[quote=“Stanton, post:336, topic:2720”]To my own surprise, after all the things I had read about DU, I think it is QTs weakest film so far.
It is much weaker than IB, with which it shares a lot of his narrative structure, it is far less brilliant than IB or Death Proof (which is excellent), in fact it does not contain very much really great stuff. The long middle part on Candyland, in short all the Di Caprio stuff, is pretty strong.
Foxx is a good lead, and his laconic alliance with the ever talking Waltz, who gives again a find but less great than in IB performance, works well enough. And di Caprio is great, while Jackson has great role on his side.
But I really did not like the splatter aspect of the violence, nor do I think that the general handling of the action in DU is well done. But the most disappointing aspect was that he characterized nearly all the secondary characters as ugly white trash caricatures, which destroyed half of the scenes. The ending is also not convincing.
I don’t know, it had the potential for another classic, but QT has spoiled it. 7/10[/quote]
Yes, I do agree. I was expecting it to actually end either with Django getting his wife, Schultz getting his bounty, and Candie left on his plantation in peace; or with Broomhilda and/or Schultz dying, and then Django killing candie and then blowing up the plantation.
I agree with you about the action. Not kind of action I want to see in western.
Wow…please tell me you’re kidding…
The splatter action is so over the top that it has no effect for me. Sometimes less can be better, has more of an impact / shock value.