• 116 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
#51 Posted by DriveupLife (918 posts) -

@jdh5153: 2/10 troll

#52 Posted by SethPhotopoulos (5301 posts) -

I haven't watched all of his movies but out of the one's I have seen they all were very uneven and had no idea what tone they were going for. I think Tarantino's best movie is Pulp Fiction because all of the pieces felt like they belonged (except for the out of nowhere horror/rape movie thing.) The Kill Bill movies felt like they went all over the place. From what I've heard of this movie it sounds very uneven as a lot of his other movies and a bit too long. I'm not very interested.

#53 Posted by hidys (1029 posts) -

@jdh5153: That was a joke right? For the love of God please tell me that was a joke post.

#54 Posted by PeasantAbuse (5138 posts) -

I want to see this so bad. I'm going to try and get a friend to go with me tomorrow.

#55 Posted by el_stork (65 posts) -

@SethPhotopoulos: Out of curiosity, have you seen Reservoir Dogs?

#56 Posted by Pr1mus (3950 posts) -

@MikeGosot said:

@BoG: To be fair, i think Taratino's dialogue is just... okay. There are some clever moments that i like and i really enjoyed the gun conversation in Death Proof, but for me they're just okay. In Pulp Fiction the hamburger talk was alright, and the Superman line in Kill Bill was awesome, but... That's it. In IB there was some dialogue in the beginning of the movie when there are some guys hiding in the house... AND THAT DIALOGUE TOOK SO FUCKING LONG. The scene had everything to be tense and it just made me feel bored. The part where Brad Pitt tries to fake an accent? WTF was that? A goddamn cartoon? The movie sucked all the emotion from me in certain scenes, and the movie was really slow! Nothing happens! And when it happens? It's lackluster. And i really fucking loved Kill Bill so i don't know what went wrong here. Also, I'm sorry if my explanation sucks, it's 3 A.M. here.

I feel the same about that opening scene in Basterds that goes on for about 15mins. Also a bit about it being a slow movie. If i was to compare the dialogues between the two movie i would say the ones in Django are funnier in that you have a lot of a smarter and more sophisticated character just making everyone else around him sound like cavemen. The subject matter is every bit as serious as in Basterds but the characterization is such that i really laughed out loud many times throughout the film which didn't necessarily happens in most other Tarantino films. This definitely helped make it seem like the movie was more dynamic and moved faster but make no mistake, it is still a slow and long movie.

As for the big payout in Basterds being lackluster, i don't know about that. If that didn't do it for you than it may be worth waiting for it to come out on video. I just don't want to spoil it so i'll just say that some of the bigger action scenes in Django are in the same vein as the ones in Basterds. Well really in the same vein as in a Tarantino movie i guess.

#57 Posted by SethPhotopoulos (5301 posts) -

@el_stork said:

@SethPhotopoulos: Out of curiosity, have you seen Reservoir Dogs?

I have but admittedly it's been a few years and I haven't retained much about it.

#58 Posted by el_stork (65 posts) -

@SethPhotopoulos: It's just that it's a more cohesive film than many of his others.

#59 Posted by SethPhotopoulos (5301 posts) -

@el_stork said:

@SethPhotopoulos: It's just that it's a more cohesive film than many of his others.

Then I'll have to watch it again.

#60 Posted by BoG (5191 posts) -

@MikeGosot: Yeah, you ought to wait on Django. You should definitely see it, though that's the fanboy in me speaking. I didn't think that Basterds dragged at all, but if you felt it did, you'll think that Django dragsin places. One of Django's most important scenes is similar to the first scene in Basterds, as it's a very tense conversation. It's much longer than that scene in Basterds, too. That doesn't sound like your cup of tea.

You'll probably like the dialogue in Django more than the others, but it's still really Tarantino, and it seems like that's hit/miss for you.

Again, see it, but based on your taste there is no need to rush.

#61 Edited by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

Tarintino loves to throw the N word around, he tried to make that word funny in this movie.

@jdh5153 said:

@TooWalrus said:

@jdh5153: It's not.

Looks like a non funny Western version of Rush Hour.

#62 Posted by mordukai (7157 posts) -

Well. I'll see what Mark Kermode has to say on the issue. Not that I follow on his every word but when it comes to the Tarantino issue we fully agree on that. So far the best movie he has ever made is Jacky Brown.

#63 Posted by OllyOxenFree (4976 posts) -

I really want to see it but I think I'll wait for the blu-ray release in order to watch it in the comfort of my own home.

#64 Posted by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

@OllyOxenFree said:

I really want to see it but I think I'll wait for the blu-ray release in order to watch it in the comfort of my own home.

Thats pretty much how I feel for every movie these days. Avatar and Hobbit were exceptions because of the new technology.

#65 Posted by Brendan (7834 posts) -

LOL at several users and a mod for Christ's sake being taken in by the most obvious troll in the world. I'm shaking my head at you people.

#66 Posted by believer258 (11984 posts) -

@Brendan said:

LOL at several users and a mod for Christ's sake being taken in by the most obvious troll in the world. I'm shaking my head at you people.

As someone who has fallen for trolls an embarrassingly large number of times? Yeah, I am also shaking my head. It was so obvious, duders.

#67 Posted by Zleunamme (682 posts) -

I got to see the movie yesterday and it was better than I expected. There where points when the movie was funny. There where points it is was brutal and grim. Jamie Fox kicks ass and the supporting cast is amazing. The movie is not meant for everybody and is not suppose to be a documentary on slavery. It's a revenge fantasy set in a spaghetti western. The movie is worth the price of admission and compliments Quentin Tarantino's filmography.

The user comparing Django Unchained to Rush Hour doesn't know what they are talking about.

: I was wondering about that character. She seemed out of place. I thought she was using the mask to disguise herself as a man to fit in. It seem that her second appearance and what she was looking at had a lot symbolism.

#68 Posted by ShaggE (6545 posts) -

Before I see this, I need to know: how chained is Django in this film?

#69 Edited by YoThatLimp (1924 posts) -

@BoG said:

@Pr1mus said:

@jdh5153 said:

@TooWalrus said:

@jdh5153: It's not.

Looks like a non funny Western version of Rush Hour.

Then you know absolutely nothing about this movie.

Then he knows absolutely nothing about Quentin Tarantino. Do yourself a favor man, see Django, Pulp Fiction, Inglorious Basterds, Kill Bill... anything by Tarantino.

Django was fantastic. First, QFT:

@Pr1mus said:

And goddamn is Christoph Waltz an amazing actor. He was a revelation in Inglourious Basterds and manages to top that performance in Django.

When the credits rolled, I only wanted to know who played Dr. King. He was amazing in this movie. Until you said this, I didn't realize he was in Basterds, but the moment you said that I knew exactly what you were talking about. Give that man 100 awards. Dr. King Schultz is probably my new favorite Tarantino character. Speaking of acting, everyone did a great job in this movie. Jamie Foxx was great, Leo was fantastic, the acting was so good.

The writing was up to par with every other Tarantino film. So, that means it was fantastic.

I'm going to go back and rewatch every Tarantino film. I want to look for the subtle criticisms of American intelligence, realtive to that of people from other countries. In this movie, Dr. Schultz is far more intelligent than any other character. In the beginning, the two slave traders demand a few times that he "speak English" when they don't know the words he uses. The most intelligent American we meet, Calvin Candie, is still a dimwit compared to King. His English is poor, and he doesn't even know who Dumas is, in spite of being a self-proclaimed "francophile." Inglorious Basterds was similar. All of the European characters I can recall were more intelligent than the American Basterds."Gratzee!" I doubt I'll find anything similar in the earlier films, but I need to look.

Anyways, Django is another great addition to the Tarantino canon.

@jdh5153 said:

@ImaTreee said:

@jdh5153 said:

@TooWalrus said:

@jdh5153: It's not.

Looks like a non funny Western version of Rush Hour.

are you familiar with tarantino's work at all?

Nope. Never really heard of him...I think he made The Matrix, but never cared to watch it.

Ok, google him NOW. He did NOT make The Matrix.

I thought the writing, especially some of the dialogue was sometimes pretty bad.

"Hercules? More like Niggules!"

blah, it is like he was writing Scary Movie dialogue at points. And the last 20 minutes of the movie was pretty bad.

#70 Edited by Bumpton (449 posts) -

1. Django Unchained was fucking amazing.

2. When did the GB community get so bad at sniffing out trolls?

3. In an interview, Tarantino stated that Broomhilda von Shaft is supposed to be the great-great grandmother of Shaft. Thought I'd share that in case you guys hadn't heard, because I thought it was fucking great.

4. He also stated that this film was targeted at people that will see it on cable tv 15-to-20 years from now since that's how he viewed all the classic spaghetti westerns. I also thought that was amazing and I feel like I can totally see it in the film.

5. I have a bit of bias toward Tarantino so maybe you guys didn't have the hard-on I did throughout the movie...

Edit:

#71 Posted by ShadowConqueror (3064 posts) -

I thought it was great. Basterds is still my favorite Tarantino film, but Django was a lot of fun.

#72 Posted by Hunter5024 (5805 posts) -

Maybe I just wasn't in the right frame of mind when I saw it, but I was kind of lukewarm on it. I thought the western setting might allow Tarantino to do something new and interesting, but honestly it felt just like all of his other movies, and I love those, but I'm ready to see him do something different. It felt more like a series of events then a story to me honestly, and the only bits I thought were really good were all due to performances rather than directing or writing. Although that scene with the head bags has convinced me that Tarantino should make a straight up comedy.

Online
#73 Posted by jillsandwich (762 posts) -

@Bumpton

3. In an interview, Tarantino stated that Broomhilda von Shaft is supposed to be the great-great grandmother of Shaft. Thought I'd share that in case you guys hadn't heard, because I thought it was fucking great.

4. He also stated that this film was targeted at people that will see it on cable tv 15-to-20 years from now since that's how he viewed all the classic spaghetti westerns. I also thought that was amazing and I feel like I can totally see it in the film.

That's dope as fuck. Both of those facts are amazing.

#74 Posted by Meltac (2003 posts) -

Why is there still a month 'till it comes to my town? I need to see it!

#75 Posted by Superfriend (1564 posts) -

Oh man... I still have to wait until it releases over here. It´s killing me!!!

#76 Posted by Castiel (2661 posts) -

@BoG said:

@jdh5153: May I ask, what movies do you like?

@BoG: Probably American Pie 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, ,13, 14, 15, and Scary Movie 3, 4 and 5.

"He" has probably already answered you at this point, but I don't really care what "he" answered. If jdhblablabla is going to act ignorant, then I'm going to act ignorant towards him.

#77 Posted by solidlife (882 posts) -

Not out till next month in the UK :(

#78 Posted by Vitor (2823 posts) -

As someone who thought that Inglorious contained both Tarantino's best and worst work, and was generally underwhelmed by that movie, what are the chances of me enjoying Django? I also felt Kill Bill to be the start of a self indulgent streak for Tarantino and the sign that the guy needs a firm editor.

#79 Posted by Wampa1 (707 posts) -

@BoG: With Basterds I felt like I was sold a false bill of goods. The Trailers, marketing and interviews all drove home this very grindhouse "3 hours of ultra violent camp nazi hunting". Whereas within the movie itself the Basterds were a tiny part of a whole. The cinema story was the main focus of that movie and now that we are far enough away from it's initial release I can appreciate it, but at the time I felt I had been given a bait and switch.

#80 Posted by Hunter5024 (5805 posts) -

@jdh5153 said:

@Iodine said:

@0blivion

Obvious troll is obvious.

I wanted to see how long people would fall for that. I figured the matrix was obvious enough

Obvious? Could've sworn it was by the Tarantino brothers or whatever. Didn't they both make those grindhouse movies? Those guys made the Matrix as far as I was aware...but I've never cared to pay the slightest attention to the matrix or who made it.

Totally, except it's just "The Tarantinos" since the sex change.

Online
#81 Edited by Karmum (11519 posts) -

@jdh5153:

Right, you won't waste your energy googling him, but you'll expend that energy by making silly and false statements, such as him directing The Matrix.

Right.

It's hard work making sense, I know. Well, actually I don't.

#82 Edited by MocBucket62 (1244 posts) -

I'm definitely gonna see this sooner or later. If we are gonna compare this film to anything, it sort of looks like a more violent version of Blazing Saddles. 
 
However, the crew at Spill.com provided much different opinions about this movie than what most people think of it. What do you think?

#83 Posted by Pr1mus (3950 posts) -

@ShaggE said:

Before I see this, I need to know: how chained is Django in this film?

The film starts with Django chained at the ankles and then, after an interesting dialogue, he get's unchained.

The film is very effectively titled.

#84 Edited by SecondPersonShooter (620 posts) -

I loved the movie but the audience killed it for me a little bit. They were laughing in spots that were obviously supposed to be disturbing, and it really distracted the emotions I felt I was supposed to feel in the film, specifically people were laughing during the part with the

mandingo fighting, and the part where the slave was ripped apart by dogs

These were the two most disturbing parts of the film and it was ridiculous to me how many people in the audience refused to see the movie as anything but a comedy. Also, the word "nigger' is not intrinsically funny.

Also, did anyone else read that when DiCaprio smashes the wine glass and cuts open his hand, that that was actually an accident and he really did cut open his hand? He just kept rolling with the scene while his hand was bleeding, which, is kind of fucked up, but elevates that scene to an entire new level.

#85 Edited by Aegon (5702 posts) -

@MocBucket62 said:

I'm definitely gonna see this sooner or later. If we are gonna compare this film to anything, it sort of looks like a more violent version of Blazing Saddles.

However, the crew at Spill.com provided much different opinions at this movie than what most people think of it. What do you think?

I tend to agree with what I've heard so far. It was too extreme and like they said, it was "too much" and he was "in desperate need of an editor".

#86 Edited by Pr1mus (3950 posts) -

@SecondPersonShooter said:

Also, did anyone else read that when DiCaprio smashes the wine glass and cuts open his hand, that that was actually an accident and he really did cut open his hand? He just kept rolling with the scene while his hand was bleeding, which, is kind of fucked up, but elevates that scene to an entire new level.

Especially the part where he

smears the blood on Broomhilda's face. For a few second there Leo became the sick fuck his character is supposed to be!
#87 Posted by MariachiMacabre (7099 posts) -
@SecondPersonShooter

I loved the movie but the audience killed it for me a little bit. They were laughing in spots that were obviously supposed to be disturbing, and it really distracted the emotions I felt I was supposed to feel in the film, specifically people were laughing during the part with the

mandingo fighting, and the part where the slave was ripped apart by dogs

These were the two most disturbing parts of the film and it was ridiculous to me how many people in the audience refused to see the movie as anything but a comedy. Also, the word "nigger' is not intrinsically funny.

Also, did anyone else read that when DiCaprio smashes the wine glass and cuts open his hand, that that was actually an accident and he really did cut open his hand? He just kept rolling with the scene while his hand was bleeding, which, is kind of fucked up, but elevates that scene to an entire new level.

Your fellow audience members sound racist as fuck.
#88 Posted by SecondPersonShooter (620 posts) -

@MariachiMacabre said:

@SecondPersonShooter

I loved the movie but the audience killed it for me a little bit. They were laughing in spots that were obviously supposed to be disturbing, and it really distracted the emotions I felt I was supposed to feel in the film, specifically people were laughing during the part with the

mandingo fighting, and the part where the slave was ripped apart by dogs

These were the two most disturbing parts of the film and it was ridiculous to me how many people in the audience refused to see the movie as anything but a comedy. Also, the word "nigger' is not intrinsically funny.

Also, did anyone else read that when DiCaprio smashes the wine glass and cuts open his hand, that that was actually an accident and he really did cut open his hand? He just kept rolling with the scene while his hand was bleeding, which, is kind of fucked up, but elevates that scene to an entire new level.

Your fellow audience members sound racist as fuck.

Maybe, I'd say the audience was about half comprised of black people. They were laughing in inappropriate spots too, I think people just misread a lot of the film as a comedy. I don't know what that says about Django accomplishing what it was trying to do, it may have just been a case of contagious uncomfortable laughter that plagues a lot of scenes like that in theaters. When it was all said and done, I would have preferred to see the movie alone.

Also, no laughter at legitimately funny parts of the movie. My friends and I were laughing at the ridiculously slow text crawl of MISSISSIPPI across the screen, and nobody else seemed to think it was funny. I thought it was hilarious.

#89 Posted by Aegon (5702 posts) -

@SecondPersonShooter:

MIS...

SIS...

SIP...

PI

#90 Posted by HerbieBug (4212 posts) -

2 hours 46 minutes is too long for me to see in a theatre. Will watch when the disc comes out.

#91 Posted by TruthTellah (9307 posts) -

@SecondPersonShooter said:

@MariachiMacabre said:

@SecondPersonShooter

I loved the movie but the audience killed it for me a little bit. They were laughing in spots that were obviously supposed to be disturbing, and it really distracted the emotions I felt I was supposed to feel in the film, specifically people were laughing during the part with the

mandingo fighting, and the part where the slave was ripped apart by dogs

These were the two most disturbing parts of the film and it was ridiculous to me how many people in the audience refused to see the movie as anything but a comedy. Also, the word "nigger' is not intrinsically funny.

Also, did anyone else read that when DiCaprio smashes the wine glass and cuts open his hand, that that was actually an accident and he really did cut open his hand? He just kept rolling with the scene while his hand was bleeding, which, is kind of fucked up, but elevates that scene to an entire new level.

Your fellow audience members sound racist as fuck.

Maybe, I'd say the audience was about half comprised of black people. They were laughing in inappropriate spots too, I think people just misread a lot of the film as a comedy. I don't know what that says about Django accomplishing what it was trying to do, it may have just been a case of contagious uncomfortable laughter that plagues a lot of scenes like that in theaters. When it was all said and done, I would have preferred to see the movie alone.

Also, no laughter at legitimately funny parts of the movie. My friends and I were laughing at the ridiculously slow text crawl of MISSISSIPPI across the screen, and nobody else seemed to think it was funny. I thought it was hilarious.

Sounds like a Tarantino audience to me. Some people find them more hilarious, while others are more serious about it. Django does appear to be that kind of full-cylinders movie where people may simply laugh at some serious parts to deal with the seriousness of it, and with some genuinely silly moments, it supports the more "entertainment" aspect of it. I can see how it might hinder your own personal viewing of it a bit though. Hopefully you'll get to enjoy it on your own eventually.

#92 Posted by MikeGosot (3227 posts) -
@Pr1mus: @BoG:  I'll wait on Django, but if someone invites me to go, i'll go watch it. I won a prize where i can see two movies for free in my local cinema, so there's no harm in going. And thanks guys for explaining more about the movie without spoiling it, i realize i look like a dudebro saying "YO THE CONVERSATIONS ARE TOO LONG!", so yeah, thank you guys.
#93 Posted by avidwriter (667 posts) -

I don't know. I didn't like Kill Bill, I'm kinda iffy on seeing this.

#94 Edited by Dallas_Raines (2187 posts) -

It's easily my favorite Tarantino film(I was too young to get sucked into the Pulp Fiction rush that sweeped the country and I LOVE spaghetti westerns.) Also, I had a great audience, they laughed at that the ridiculous situations and dialog and were quiet and disturbed at the appropriate sections.(Though, right after the dog scene, a person in the audience yelled out "That's one cold ass 'n-word'!"

#95 Edited by uniform (1836 posts) -
@SecondPersonShooter said:

it may have just been a case of contagious uncomfortable laughter that plagues a lot of scenes like that in theaters.

I don't know. One would think no one would want to be that person that laughs for fear of showcasing their insensitivity. I imagine some of the laughter that followed was indeed a reaction to something uncomfortable. Totally different thing, but it reminds me of when me and a group of friends went and saw A History of Violence, which showed a lovemaking scene intensify into an onscreen 69. There was a domino effect of laughter. Sure, most of these people are familiar with the act, yet it was just something you didn't expect to see in wide release studio motion pictures. It was definitely awkward, so naturally, the theater coped with it by laughing.
#96 Posted by Dallas_Raines (2187 posts) -

@uniform:

My mom didn't know how to react to Drive's sudden jumps in gory violence and awkwardly laughed at the numerous head/neck traumas in that movie.

#97 Edited by uniform (1836 posts) -
@Dallas_Raines said:

@uniform:

My mom didn't know how to react to Drive's sudden jumps in gory violence and awkwardly laughed at the numerous head/neck traumas in that movie.

Sure, I can understand that. My reaction was silent, thinking "holy shit, this is some of the most realistic gore I've seen in a film". Can't wait for Refn's next.
#98 Edited by Rudeboy217 (1769 posts) -

Samuel L Jackson was pretty much the greatest thing in the film.

Also the kkk scene.

#99 Posted by Intro (1208 posts) -

Saw it last night with my girlfriend, we both loved it.

#100 Posted by MikkaQ (10316 posts) -

SPOILER BLOCKS AREN'T WORKING FOR ME, SO ADVANCED WARNING THIS POST HAS SPOILERS.

It was a Tarantino movie. I saw it.

I kinda don't know what to think other than that. Feels like a really middle-of-the-road kinda average movie for the guy. I liked it a lot, I'd watch it again, but it's not as good as a lot of his other work.

It could have been shorter, it looked like it was going to end about three times before it actually did, the last act really dragged it's feet. The movie just kinda deflated after Candie and Schultz died. Those two were holding up most of the movie and it quickly became apparent that Foxx couldn't make up for their lack of presence with just Django.

Still excellent shootout around the end there, and Samuel L. Jackson can never fail to crack me up.

Yeah I guess the movie was another fun exercise in style but they are starting to feel a little empty. I wish that Tarantino tried to have a little more substance in his films, but I know that's not his thing. Still, it certainly couldn't hurt a movie, especially one as long as Django Unchained was.