- 3.0 (two in theater in January 2013 and once May 2017)
- It’s a brilliant and very entertaining film
- Robert Richardson as the DP does some fantastic work here- and I certainly wish this, not hateful eight– had been QT’s 65/70mm film
- Wondrously zoom-heavy– one here on Leo
- Waltz’s exacting diction is just perfect for Tarantino’s dialogue. His “brittle brothers” and “Lubbock, Texas”
- Flashbacks done in an effective washed-out (what looks like 16mm) taken straight from 1970’s b-picture cinema– sadism– feels like Last House on the Left from Craven
- Amazing shot of blood splattering on cotton– wall-art beauty and thematic resonance
- Narrative is part German folklore, Blaxploitation, western– 100% Tarantino’s world creation
- Strong soundtrack- love the Morricone title song especially– but I do understand Morricone’s issues with QT’s eclectic choices- makes for an inconsistent work formally at times as we go from John Legend to Johnny Cash then back for Morricone for themes
- The “MISSISSIPPI” titles about an hour in is absolutely bad form- a flaw
- Another flaw is Tarantino as an actor (totally miscast) and the flow of the entire last 20 minutes (basically after he’s captured)- the film is long already but it needs to be longer because it feels absolutely forced, sped up and narratively rushed, and really pushes the boundaries of the suspension of disbelief with how easy it is for Foxx to escape and double-back
- The surrealism sequences with Kerry Washington haunting the Jamie Foxx character is really well done
- Lovely De Palma 360 shot (from Hitchcock) near the end of Foxx and the Aussies
- It is a major achievement for these 4 lead actors: DiCaprio, Foxx, Waltz and Samuel L. Jackson
- 4.0 June 2019
- Shot through a noose – mise-en-scene
- Glorious Spanish Moss tree mise-en-scene as well
- Many David Lean-esque picture-frame establishing and traveling shows
- The best shot in the film is the tracking in on Foxx with Spanish moss in the background
- The film is hilarious – “Francophile” then says actually speaking French to Calvin will insult him- haha
- There’s a formal call-back with the manners- the first time we’re introduced to Leo’s Calvin Waltz’s character notes aloud that Calvin doesn’t allow for his lawyer to make the proper introductions—we end with a bad manners showdown too- marvelous
- Nods to his influences throughout—I love the scene of Nero spelling Django with Foxx
- Samuel L Jackson has rarely been better- -big and bold here— in a film with big and bold performances
- Candy Land as a set piece—awesome—and then we get the nice slow motion as they arrive there
- Leo is also a big figure—it’s needed for the role—it’s a stretch – but he’s sort of playing the Billy Zane “Cal” role in Titanic
- Phrenology speech—really strong writing and performance from Leo playing through the bleeding hand
- The handshake show-down with Waltz is incredible—“I’m sorry. I couldn’t resist”
- Another overhead shot of the carnage—comes up in QT’s filmography
- Cartoonish. Horse trick ending. Tough to line up formally
- Wholly linear narrative— which is not QT’s norm
- A Must-See film
Drake, do you think this film would’ve been better or worse with Will Smith in the Django role, as originally envisioned by QT?
Not the person you’re talking to But I think Will would have been pretty solid not better Than Jamie but still pretty solid.
@Haider. I’m with Randy here. I’ll take Jamie here.
I’m not a big admirer of Will Smith as an actor or many of his films. My answer would always be Jamie Foxx even if we didn’t have the evidence here that he’s fantastic.
How would you rank the performances here. For me It’s,
3. Jackson & DiCaprio tied
@M*A*S*H – I see your post is from a while back but I just watched again as part of my Tarantino Study.
I thought Jamie Foxx was solid but certainly not the best, not that I had an issue with his performance as I thought it was quite good. Sam Jackson was phenomenal and shockingly becomes arguably the most evil character in the film although there is some pretty healthy competition.
Waltz was amazing, entertaining, funny, and some surprising depth
I would go:
1. Samuel Jackson and Waltz closely followed by
3. Jamie Foxx with a solid performance but not to the same level as the actors above