My Writings
Review - Django Unchained (continued)
However it is a different situation with Django Unchained. At one point in the dialogue, Candie, Schultz and Candie's white henchman are discussing Django's possible entry into the world of mandingo fighting, a ruse to get Candie to release his wife as part of the deal, because it would help Django prepare for the fight. Remind me again who wrote this rubbish? There is an avalanche of n word expletives over the next few minutes. The victim of this racist abuse stands in the corner and does not defend himself. Tarantino gives him no lines. I found this scene extremely offensive. Here, Spike Lee is correct. The moral high ground was not given to Django. The intelligensia was clearly with the white men. The humiliation was clearly with Django and it was unpleasant.
Tarantino will of course argue vehemently that he is not racist, and of course he isn't, even if he has gone on record to say that "Spike Lee can stand on a chair to kiss his ass". However some of this screenplay was racist. He may argue that his use of tomfoolery in a ku klux klan scene earlier proves whose side he is on. Well maybe, but he got the idea for that scene from Oh Brother Where Art Thou?
Tarantino should have made a decision to remove the n-word from the entire movie, perhaps with the exception of the odd expletive. His argument that people spoke that way back in the 1850s is no excuse to be pasting it all over the dialogue in 2013. In all Tarantino's screenplay used the n-word a ridiculous 110 times.
Latest Works
Tarantino wanted to make a 'southern' rather than a 'western'. This isn't a new genre that has much mileage in it in my opinion. Was it supposed to be funny? Perhaps a black comedy? It had one or two good moments early on, producing the odd giggle, but there was nothing at all wry about it. Was it supposed to be serious? Tarantino seems to have planned it to be, saying he wanted America to be ashamed of itself when they saw it. That is way off the mark, it was too stupid to be taken seriously. Would it stand repeat viewing? Well, the dialogue wasn't nearly clever enough, despite the occasional line such as 'The D is silent'. The plot devices were not engaging. Did it look great? The cinematography had nothing new. There was the odd homage to previous movies, but no comic strip elements or clever use of angles or sweeping cameras to convey the great outdoors.
Which takes me back to Seven Psychopaths. That is fresh, very funny, has super dialogue, is witty and engaging. It also has a better cast, and a sensible running time. Tarantino has fallen into the trap of so many writer/directors, of not allowing the producers to put a cap on the running time of 2hrs 35 minutes, which is 25 minutes too long. Its not as if the plot was convoluted enough or the movie had anything particularly interesting to say to justify the extra time. Jackie Brown was long, but that was a brilliant movie and it needed to be long to cover all the plot-lines.
Seven Psychopaths won the London film festival but has been ignored at the BAFTAs, OSCARs and Golden Globes. Presumably McDonagh will gain recognition later in his career, when, as Tarantino has demonstrated here, he is way past his best.
2/10 Wildly Overrated