[Dombo]

I have enjoyed everything QT has done and this was no exception, cant wait to watch it again when its released on bluray.

i agree with the comments its could have ended half hour earlier, but thats no big drama imo,

i dont think QT has got too big for his boots so to speak but he has constant praise lavished upon him, so he is going to take it on board.

[CJClarke]

I agree that the film was maybe 15 minutes too long where the last bit could have been condensed into the preceding scene somehow:

Spoiler

i.e. if they'd skipped Django getting caught and hung upside down, it would have been better if the shootout where Schultz died had been the end (obviously Django would have had to have found a gun or had one hidden up his sleeve like Schultz or something). They could have gone straight from the dinner table to Schultz getting shot and then Django killing everybody without losing anything. The capture scene was fairly pointless (although it did have a sense of coming full circle with Django freeing the slaves from the Australians, which is why QT probably put that scene in).

I fail to see how the added 15 minutes is QT letting his own hype go to his head though, the prior 150 minutes were excellent, and the ending didn't let it down exactly, it just felt like it was stretched a bit where it could have been condensed. He's one of the most unique film makers working today, and if he keeps giving us films like Django i'd be very happy.

[Lady Spice]

Originally Posted by CJClarke

I agree that the film was maybe 15 minutes too long where the last bit could have been condensed into the preceding scene somehow:

Spoiler

i.e. if they'd skipped Django getting caught and hung upside down, it would have been better if the shootout where Schultz died had been the end (obviously Django would have had to have found a gun or had one hidden up his sleeve like Schultz or something). They could have gone straight from the dinner table to Schultz getting shot and then Django killing everybody without losing anything. The capture scene was fairly pointless (although it did have a sense of coming full circle with Django freeing the slaves from the Australians, which is why QT probably put that scene in).

I fail to see how the added 15 minutes is QT letting his own hype go to his head though, the prior 150 minutes were excellent, and the ending didn't let it down exactly, it just felt like it was stretched a bit where it could have been condensed. He's one of the most unique film makers working today, and if he keeps giving us films like Django i'd be very happy.

I think that scene was included to illustrate the horrors of slavery, and the things that slavers did to keep their chattel under control. If the film had ended where you suggest, (which I agree, it should have,) Django could still have freed all the slaves, and they could ALL have ridden off into the sunset together!

[SarahMarie]

Superb film. Best Tarantino since Pulp Fiction? CONTROVERSIAL thought but very possible I think.

Some words from me here, would love to know what people think:

http://www.thisisafilmblog.com/django-unchained-2013/

[Chrisholland]

Originally Posted by SarahMarie

Superb film. Best Tarantino since Pulp Fiction? CONTROVERSIAL thought but very possible I think.

Some words from me here, would love to know what people think:

http://www.thisisafilmblog.com/django-unchained-2013/

Saw it last night, I didn't know the cut hand was genuine. I thought he looked a little distracted by it. Interesting.

Your blog is well written but i'd try and avoid lines like 'this side of the pond' etc. They're words that many people have written many times before. Its like there's a big book of lines that can be copied and pasted for film reviews by everyone.

Sometimes film reviewers try to be too clever, like they see and understand things others don't, it alienates the reader, makes them feel they're not as clever as you for not noticing.

I enjoy reading Roger Ebert's film reviews, he writes quite simplistically, just tells it like it is but it's refreshing. You sometimes finish reading his work not sure if he actually liked the film or not. A reviewer should review a film, we then decide if we want to see it.

You do write well, keep doing it!

[Tia77]

I saw this film last night and really enjoyed it. Like others have said the 2hr 45m flew by.

[wiseguy100]

He gets called indulgent, like it's a bad thing. He makes films that he would like to see. What's wrong with that? Especially if you happen to love cinema, and the films that Tarantino homages.

With critics like yourselves, Tarantino can't win either way. If he was given a film to direct of a popular franchise, then you'd all call him a sellout.

If you can't understand Tarantino's mantra, then you have no place watching his films, nevermind offering your critique. Simple as that.

[streetwise]

Originally Posted by wiseguy100

If you can't understand Tarantino's mantra, then you have no place watching his films, nevermind offering your critique. Simple as that.

Oh dear.

[Dombo]

Does anyone else think that

Spoiler

Dr Shultz and Django found the brothers far too quickly? i know it would have made the film even longer but if the half hour at the end was cut and more time looking for the brothers.

just a thought..

[oldhag]

Originally Posted by icicletusk

Christoph Waltz was amazing and kind of over shadowed what I thought would be Leo as the best performance in the movie. Fantastic film.

Bloody brilliant film! Christoph Waltz surely must win all the awards to be awarded at all award shows. Amazing!

No-one has mentioned Dusk till Dawn in Quentin's praise. It's a great film too.

I love to see him appear in a part in his films and he must do them tongue-in-cheek. I noticed how all the actors had their LA teeth made up to look dentist free. Quentin's were sparkly white and even - it had to be on purpose!

[doom&gloom]

Originally Posted by wiseguy100

He gets called indulgent, like it's a bad thing. He makes films that he would like to see. What's wrong with that? Especially if you happen to love cinema, and the films that Tarantino homages.

With critics like yourselves, Tarantino can't win either way. If he was given a film to direct of a popular franchise, then you'd all call him a sellout.

If you can't understand Tarantino's mantra, then you have no place watching his films, nevermind offering your critique. Simple as that.

But should he really be tackling serious topics like the holocaust and slavery? His brand of enjoyable B-Movie schlock is not really suited to those types of topics I don't think.

[Uk Ltd]

Originally Posted by doom&gloom

But should he really be tackling serious topics like the holocaust and slavery? His brand of enjoyable B-Movie schlock is not really suited to those types of topics I don't think.

Wait til he does his take on Northern Ireland.

Feckin paddys, etc

[Dombo]

Originally Posted by Uk Ltd

Wait til he does his take on Northern Ireland.

Feckin paddys, etc

i would LOVE to see that...

QT Presents, Flegs etc....

[Matt D]

Originally Posted by SarahMarie

Superb film. Best Tarantino since Pulp Fiction? CONTROVERSIAL thought but very possible I think.

Some words from me here, would love to know what people think:

http://www.thisisafilmblog.com/django-unchained-2013/

Good review. I thought that he had directed eight films, though, not ten?

Reservoir Dogs
Pulp Fiction
Jackie Brown
Kill Bill 1 & 2
Death Proof
Inglourious Basterds
Django Unchained

[mialicious]

Originally Posted by Matt D

Good review. I thought that he had directed eight films, though, not ten?

Reservoir Dogs
Pulp Fiction
Jackie Brown
Kill Bill 1 & 2
Death Proof
Inglourious Basterds
Django Unchained

he also directed a segment of four rooms that he never mentions

[killthedirector]

saw it last night. thought it was brilliant. probably my favourite tarantino film.

[CJClarke]

I watched it for a second time last night and i enjoyed it even more than the first time, mainly because the last 15 minutes or so doesn't drag when you know how close to the end it is. Superb film and i look forward to getting the Blu Ray

[ukool]

Im very new to Tarantino films, only seen Pulp Fiction and now Django, I enjoyed it more then i thought i was going to. I only went because my boy friend wanted to see it, but im very happy i went along. Didnt think thier would be any comedy in this, and was expecting a long, boring film with a few gun fights!

[Jackapple]

I enjoyed it a lot, although I thought Samuel L Jackson didnt look old enough, his limp wasn't all that convincing and he's taller than Dicaprio, i think someone shorter would have worked better.

[Lady Spice]

I thought this was SLJ's best role in ages!

[mialicious]

Originally Posted by Jackapple

I enjoyed it a lot, although I thought Samuel L Jackson didnt look old enough, his limp wasn't all that convincing and he's taller than Dicaprio, i think someone shorter would have worked better.

I think Sam jackson was brilliant in this, and hilarious!

Spoiler

His limp wasnt convincing because his character was just pretending to limp the whole time as he revealed at the end and thats why django then shot him in the legs

[Jackapple]

Originally Posted by mialicious

I think Sam jackson was brilliant in this, and hilarious!

Spoiler

His limp wasnt convincing because his character was just pretending to limp the whole time as he revealed at the end and thats why django then shot him in the legs

fair enough!

[R Molehusband]

I thought this film was excellent. I didn't think it was nearly as gory or as bloody as some people have suggested, although there were a couple of eye wincing bits. The comedic bits were absolutely hilarious.

Wonderful soundtrack, some excellent performances as well. Yip, thoroughly enjoyed it.

[stripedcat]

I saw this today. Really liked it. Although it was a long film(2hrs 45 mins) - it seemed to have a decent pace, and although I'd have liked it to have been a bit shorter, I can't really say what I would have cut from the film.

Christophe Waltz was superb. So too were Di Capiro, Jackson and Fox(although he has the quieter role for the most part).

One bad thing - QT can't act for ****! Was that meant to be an Australian accent? Hmmm. Sorry. Someone should just say that he should stick to directing.

It wasn't as violent as previous QT films.

I might do a repeat trip to the cinema.

I would probably put this as QT's third best film, after 'Reservoir Dogs' and 'Pulp Fiction'.

[Muttley76]

Enjoyed this a lot, though it has to be said it is rather overlong - could have easily lopped off 20-30 minutes to the films benefit.

Still, one of QT's most sparkling of scripts and some great acting performances from Waltz, Jackson and Foxx.

Interesting to read people commenting on how hilarious they thought Jackson was, for me his performance was uncomfortably compelling one and very dark in nature.

I do agree with some prior comments that Kerry Washington didn't really work in what was a pivotal, if smallish, role - you never got any sense why she was so special, nor did she really seem to have any chemistry with Foxx whatsoever.

But on the whole it was good stuff

8/10