Review: Django Unchained

Set in Texas in the 1850s, Christoph Waltz plays a Germanic dentist turned bounty hunter named Schultz who manages to buy a slave named Django (Jamie Foxx, the second x is silent, I believe). Django, you see, is the only person who can point out a gang of murderous stagecoach robbers (M.C. Gainey among them) Schultz is on the hunt for. Along the way, the good doctor (who doesn’t believe in slavery) comes to see merit in Django, frees him and even makes him his deputy and business partner. After a rather profitable partnership, their intentions turn to tracking down Django’s wife Broomhilda von Shaft (Kerry Washington), getting onto the plantation she is currently at. Hildy’s owner, the vile racist ‘gentleman’ and Francophile, Calvin Candie (Leonardo DiCaprio- potentially scarring young female fans forever) runs a Mississippi plantation called Candyland, and runs Mandingo boxing matches. The plan is to pretend to be interested in buying a Mandingo fighter from Candie and somehow whisk Hildy away. A potential hitch comes in the form of Candie’s crotchety, but most trusted ‘House Negro’ Stephen (Samuel L. Jackson as what might be called an Uncle Tom), who seems to recognise a connection between Hildy and Django and also seems jealous of the freed, outspoken black man. James Remar has dual roles as one of Django’s initial captors and one of Candie’s henchmen, Jonah Hill plays a dopey Klansman, Don Johnson plays a plantation owner named Big Daddy, Walton Goggins is one of Candie’s most evil henchmen, Dennis Christopher is one of Candie’s chief advisors, Franco Nero turns up as a Mandingo owner, Bruce Dern has a cameo as a vicious slave owner in flashbacks, FX whiz Tom Savini and Kiwi stuntwoman Zoe Bell play a couple of trackers, while father and daughter Russ and Amber Tamblyn play ‘Son of a Gunfighter’ and ‘Daughter of Son of a Gunfighter’, respectively. Tom Wopat turns up as a U.S. Marshall, Don Stroud plays a Sheriff, and Quentin Tarantino himself appears alongside veteran Aussie actor John Jarratt as a couple of Aussie-accented mining company employees, late in the film (Tarantino regular Michel Parks is also seen with them).

 

Quentin Tarantino and I haven’t always been on the same wavelength, despite clearly loving a lot of the same films. I think “Reservoir Dogs” is overrated but solid, I’ve never liked “Pulp Fiction”, and I wished “Jackie Brown” were much more fast-paced blaxploitation tribute than elongated. Elmore Leonard adaptation. However, in the last decade or so, for the most part he has been winning me over with highly enjoyable films like “Kill Bill” volumes I & II, and “Inglourious Basterds”. I won’t hold “Death Proof” against him, because even he thinks it’s his worst film (I’d probably say “Pulp Fiction”, but anyway...) I think this 2012 mixture of spaghetti western and blaxploitation, however, is the film he has been working towards his entire career. I think it’s his best film to date, even if it loses its way a touch near the end with at least one unfortunate and dodgy Australian accent from QT himself.

 

We open strongly with an absolutely kick-arse theme song that, although it belonged to the original “Django” film from 1966, is an unmistakable and brilliant mixture of Frankie Laine (“Gunfight at the OK Corral”, “Blazing Saddles”) and Ennio Morricone (“The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly”, “Once Upon a Time in the West”), the latter of whom does indeed appear on this film’s soundtrack.

 

Meanwhile, an Oscar-nominated Christoph Waltz is hilarious from moment one, and as far as I’m concerned, he should appear in every QT film. I’m sure Quentin had a great time writing Waltz’s somewhat ‘fancy’ dialogue, in particular (not to mention he probably had a great time selecting Django’s costumes, a mixture of cowboy outfit and blaxploitation pimp). I would even wager that Waltz steals his every scene from Jamie Foxx in the title role, who ends up almost being a supporting character in his own film. In that regard, I almost don’t blame Will Smith for politely (if possibly egotistically) turning the role down for that very reason. Foxx is solid, sure (I think Djimon Hounsou would’ve had more presence in the role, though), but Waltz, Samuel L. Jackson, and especially Leonardo DiCaprio steal the show from him. This is Leo’s best work since “Blood Diamond”, and although he may not be believable per se, the film is over-the-top anyway and Leo is terrific fun as the chief villain of the piece. In fact, I’d even go so far as to say that this is the best performance of the man’s uneven career, yes even better than his excellent turns in “What’s Eating Gilbert Grape”, “This Boy’s Life” and “The Aviator”. Even his accent is perfect. In perhaps the most controversial performance in the film, Samuel L. Jackson gives his best performance since “Resurrecting the Champ”. He also has rather realistic old-age makeup too (something that he also had for the aforementioned boxing story). Sure, it would’ve been nice if the role went to a blaxploitation veteran (Let’s say Fred ‘The Hammer’ Williamson, Jim Brown, Richard Roundtree, or Antonio Fargas, who would’ve been perfect), but Jackson is terrific. He also manages to steer the potentially offensive character away from Stepin Fetchit/Prissy territory. This is Stepin Fetchit with a darker and more cynical twist. He might just be the only living actor who could get away with it, and he sure as hell swears a blue streak, as is his wont most times.

 

 Look out for a great cameo by Bruce Dern, as well as the original “Django” star Franco Nero, and fine supporting work by Walton Goggins in the kind of slimy henchman role Dern would’ve played in his younger days. Meanwhile, Don Johnson is at least a million times more effective here than he was in Robert Rodriguez’s “Machete” (or in anything else he has done for that matter).

 

Sensitive types (<cough> Spike Lee <cough>) might think the film trivialises slavery in the name of post-modern entertainment, but that would be an incorrect interpretation. Yes, it’s very touchy subject matter QT is dealing with here, but I think it mixes surprisingly well with the video store geek sensibilities of the writer/director without seeming to mock or trivialise a very serious subject. Besides, this is too damn funny and intentionally schlocky (a bit more “Mandingo” than “Roots”) for people to complain about, surely. I mean, look at that brilliant flashback shot in overexposed fashion like a crap, faded C-grade western from the early 70s. And let’s face it, the Ku Klux Klan deserve to be made to look like fools, don’t they? And a slave named Von Shaft? Really? That’s priceless.

 

But make no mistake, this isn’t just schlock. It’s not a simple-minded piece of trash, rather Tarantino’s unique and idiosyncratic take on slavery (which is critical of some of the slaves themselves who were complicit on some of the awful things going on) and the spaghetti western, and it’s an extremely well-made and interesting film that far exceeds the merits of many of the mostly B-grade (and sometimes lesser) films Tarantino is influenced by, and not just in running time (but boy is it ever a long one). What the man does isn’t just name-dropping, he wears his influences on his sleeve and turns them into something uniquely Tarantino. I mean, Tarantino has rarely found a story he couldn’t work character actor Michael Parks into or a blaxploitation reference. And it has a sort of social conscience, but it’s social conscience Tarantino-style, I guess is what I can say about it. Meanwhile, the scenery in particular is wonderfully captured by cinematographer Robert Richardson (“Platoon”, “Shine a Light”, “Hugo”). And it is a frequently very funny film, with Waltz in particular so amusing that my mouth was hurting from smiling too damn much in just the opening twenty minutes.

 

I do have to take issue with some of QT’s musical choices, with way too much anachronistic hippity hop for my liking, petty as that criticism may sound, given a more ‘traditional’ music score would not really be suitable for the time period, either. But it would at least sound more suitable and less noticeably modern.

 

The film runs out of steam a bit towards the end, but warts and all, this is a strong, memorable, and funny film that is not only the best film of 2012 (narrowly beating “Chronicle”) but QT’s best film to date. Any flaws are minor, to be honest. This is a jolly good time for anyone who can appreciate QT’s fanboy video store geek sensibilities. Oh dear, am I starting to become a fan? I wouldn’t have thought so after “Pulp Fiction”, but it does rather appear that way (Though he and I appear to have seriously differing views on the merits of “Roots”, in my opinion the greatest TV miniseries of all-time). This film won’t be for everyone, but I sure as hell enjoyed it and it made me feel alive, as a movie fan. It may not have been profound or arty-farty, but it had more of a positive impact on me than any other film of 2012.

Rating: B+