DJANGO UNCHAINED

DJANGO UNCHAINED
Written and Directed by Quentin Tarantino
Starring Christoph Waltz, Jamie Foxx, Leonardo DiCaprio and Kerry Washington

Dr. King Schultz (referring to the bounty hunter profession): Like slavery, it's a flesh for cash trade.

DJANGO UNCHAINED? More like Tarantino unchained, if you ask me. When watching a Quentin Tarantino movie, there is always a danger that his undeniable genius will fall prey to his also undeniable ego. He often walks the fine line between these two elements with surprising grace and subsequently makes insightful works that are distinctly his style. In DJANGO UNCHAINED though, Tarantino's attempt at a Western / Blaxploitation hybrid, he veers too far off course and ends up losing his edge in the sprawling drawl of the Old West.

DJANGO UNCHAINED is a bounty hunter, buddy western for about an hour and then a hyper violent,  romantic quest for about two hours after that. The two parts did not come together for me but either way, I never felt that Tarantino was ever truly able to make himself fit into these genres. There are moments where his unique style feels perfectly suited to the subject, but it often times felt more forced than anything else. Christophe Waltz, who embodied Tarantino's spirit so perfectly in his Oscar-winning turn in INGLORIOUS BASTERDS, is completely miscast here. As a German dentist turned bounty hunter in 1858 Texas, he is more device than character, allowing Tarantino to incorporate his particular brand of dialogue to the period, justified by Waltz being foreign. You may delight in some of the things he has to say but I found it just exposed Tarantino's unease with the period.

Waltz acquires a slave by the name of Django (Jamie Foxx) at the onset of the film. He is sympathetic to the plight of the American slave but that doesn't stop him from purchasing Django for his own gain. When he sees how cruelly Django is treated by the people they encounter, he sets him "free" and the twosome become the biggest, badass bounty hunters around. There is a sense of shock in just how appalling people are towards their black slaves and Tarantino is here to rescue them. In this sense, DJANGO is no more than an extension of what he was going for in BASTERDS. Only instead of the Jews rising up against the Nazis, now Tarantino rewrites the history of the black slaves, giving them a hero to rise up against their oppressors.

Along the way, Waltz and Foxx come across Leonardo DiCaprio, a plantation owner reputed for fighting his slaves to their deaths. This man owns Django's wife (Kerry Washington). And when it comes time for Django to take back what is his (which is a whole other form of slavery, but no matter), everything ends in a seemingly never-ending blood bath, that plays out more like a video game, where the goal is to kill as many white supremacists as possible. It isn't triumphant though, just incessant and relentless. You can almost feel Tarantino's smug sense of satisfaction in the end but it's misguided. You cannot rewrite the wrongs of history by just shooting the crap out of them and thinking yourself a hero for having done so.

312. Django Unchained

312. (19 Dec) Django Unchained (2012, Quentin Tarantino) 75



Coming off the lean, perfectly structured Inglourious Basterds, it's not really a surprise or much a disappointment that Django Unchained isn't on par. Mostly, it's the absence of Sally Menke as film editor that's deeply felt, since this doesn't have the sharpness her collaborations with Tarantino had. But this is nevertheless engaging and exhilarating. To his credit, the substantial runtime isn't felt for a second due to clever scripting that crafts believable relationships and allows on-screen time to pass fluidly.

Christoph Waltz is certainly the standout here, though Leonardo DiCaprio sinks his teeth into a menacing role. Samuel L. Jackson, offering a variation on his same old schtick, is impossibly fun to watch chew scenery. Jamie Foxx and Kerry Washington could have been recast midway through the film without anyone noting their absence.

Robert Richardson's cinematography is outstanding, as are the sets and costumes. Oscar nominations for most technical aspects are in order.

It took two viewings of Inglourious Basterds to fully appreciate this, so I have every intention of revisiting Django. It's so dense and thoughtful, full of nuanced arcs, all the while being quite reverential to its genre. There's a great deal to take in on a single go-around, and surely much reward in a second or third attempt.

Best Supporting Actor 2004: Results

5. Jamie Foxx in Collateral- Foxx gives a functional performance some of the time, but he also fails to capitalize any scene that requires more from him.

4. Morgan Freeman in Million Dollar Baby- Freeman gives a painfully standard performance, that although it is not bad it always feels uninspired.

3. Alan Alda in The Aviator- Alda has very little to do but still his performance is effective as he shows both the charm and the cruelty of a career politician.

2. Clive Owen in Closer- Owen although has strong elements particularly in portraying the harsh bluntness of his character, but also lacks in terms of his onscreen relationships with his female co-stars.

1. Thomas Haden Church in Sideways- A very easy win for Church who easily gives the best performance of the five through his great achievement of finding a way to make what technically should be just a despicable character, a endearing one instead.

Deserving Performances:
David Carradine in Kill Bill Vol 2
Michael Madsen in Kill Bill Vol 2

Best Supporting Actor 2004: Jamie Foxx in Collateral

Jamie Foxx received one of his two nominations for portraying Max Durocher in Collateral.

Collateral tells of a hitman Vincent (Tom Cruise) who takes a cab driver hostage to bring him to his five marks on one night.

Jamie Foxx actually is not at all supporting in this film as the cab driver Vincent uses for the ride is the lead, since he even has more screen time than Cruise. Although it is obvious it was positioned this way to allow Foxx two nominations one that allowed him to undeservedly win for Ray, and this one. I will say first off that Foxx is indeed better here than he was in Ray, but that is saying very little in my opinion. This is more of a standard performance from Foxx than does not rely on mannerisms for his performance, but instead he just tries to convey the emotions of the moment.

It is an attempt at a fairly standard lead performance by Foxx since Max is just suppose to be a very standard Cab driver who happens to be in an not so ordinary situation. Foxx shows Max to be a reasonably happy man who has a dream, and does not really have a problem with his job. He than shows a very scared and frustrated man when his life becomes in danger because of the hitman. I will say Foxx is technically fine, when is scared he is scared, when he frustrated he looks frustrated, he is technically does what he needs to for the part.

Foxx though could have done far more in the part than he does, as it is a lead performance, and really he could have made Max simply into a more interesting character with the possibilities given to him. For example Cruise absolutely dominates all of their scenes together. He always controls the scene, and always has the more overpowering presence than Foxx. Yes it is true Vincent should dominate for most of the film anyways,  Cruise did not need to technically dominate as much as he does though, since Foxx never seizes any opportunity to stay with Cruise.

Foxx just stays really too standard, and functional in the part. He never reaches for more than just very simple emotions, which although are conveyed correctly, aren't all that interesting. Also later in the film there are two scenes where Max is suppose to do more and Foxx is not up for it. Firstly he must impersonate Vincent in one scene, and Foxx is not at all convincing that he could make the gangster afraid of him in the least. Secondly through the night Max is suppose to become more and more frustrated to the point he finally takes matters in his own hand, but again Foxx is not up to it.

Foxx basically keeps Max at the same level emotionally throughout, he should have slowly become more and more drained, but he just does not. Also his scene where he finally takes matters in his own should have been a powerful moment where Max's strength finally comes out, but in Foxx's failed to build toward this point effectively, and the moment itself feels quite underwhelming. Although technically adequate some of the time Foxx fails to capitalize on the possibilities of his character, and this performance ends up being a misses opportunity.

Best Supporting Actor 2004

And the Nominees Were:

Alan Alda in The Aviator

Thomas Haden Church in Sideways

Morgan Freeman in Million Dollar Baby

Clive Owen in Closer

Jamie Foxx in Collateral