#10: Django Unchained (2012)
Whoa, hold up. Isn't this too recent to be included? Although sentiment about a film matures as time passes, nothing prevents a film released yesterday from making this list. So then, exactly why does this young whippersnapper make it?
One word: fun. Wow, is the scene where Django and Dr. King "make love" to a group of Ku Klax Klan members a joy to behold. If anyone can say that wasn't immensely satisfying, they're either lying or incapable of emotion. Or when Django and King dispatch the Brittle brothers when they beat a slave girl, amongst their other atrocities. Or the brilliance of the Calvin Candie and Stephen characters. Not to mention the final scene.
"I'm making this funky new-school-style western..."
"Who stars in it?"
"So far, I've got Jamie Foxx, Leonardo Di Caprio, Samuel L. Jackson and Christoph Waltz..."
"Should be pretty good then...HOLY CRAP!? Who???"
In short, you chuck all those big names in a film, not too many, and it turns out like some witches' brew of awesomeness. From the opening scene, a nighttime confrontation between slavers and a "dentist", it never ceases to amaze. After some recent events, I find it a bit of a struggle to concentrate for long periods of time. At 2 hours, 45 minutes, I think that qualifies as "rather lengthy". Not even once did I feel bored or un-entertained.
I discovered in a brief Google query about this film that it surprisingly sparked a lot of racial shizow in the good ol' United States of America. Maybe we're more progressive than them, or less concerned about bed-wetting in general, or whatever, but a lot of it was just "WTF?". I don't mean to sound weird when I say: This film is not in any way disrespectful towards our "proud white slave-owning ancestors". Typing that out almost makes me sick. Fuck 'em.
Who cares that the Klan was only actually started after the Civil War? I just sound like some freakish Klan-lover when I say that. Like I know too much. Who cares about the so-called "spaghetti-western" nature of this? "Quentin Tarantino has SO lost the plot with this, darling..." Seriously? Pulp Fiction was a realistic depiction of gangsters, right? Films were meant to: A) Entertain us. B) Be a historically-accurate record of whatever they depict. C) Be Sunday-afternoon entertainment after our "Driving Miss Daisy"-mornings. ? Hands up if you picked A)! I want your full names!
One word: fun. Wow, is the scene where Django and Dr. King "make love" to a group of Ku Klax Klan members a joy to behold. If anyone can say that wasn't immensely satisfying, they're either lying or incapable of emotion. Or when Django and King dispatch the Brittle brothers when they beat a slave girl, amongst their other atrocities. Or the brilliance of the Calvin Candie and Stephen characters. Not to mention the final scene.
"I'm making this funky new-school-style western..."
"Who stars in it?"
"So far, I've got Jamie Foxx, Leonardo Di Caprio, Samuel L. Jackson and Christoph Waltz..."
"Should be pretty good then...HOLY CRAP!? Who???"
In short, you chuck all those big names in a film, not too many, and it turns out like some witches' brew of awesomeness. From the opening scene, a nighttime confrontation between slavers and a "dentist", it never ceases to amaze. After some recent events, I find it a bit of a struggle to concentrate for long periods of time. At 2 hours, 45 minutes, I think that qualifies as "rather lengthy". Not even once did I feel bored or un-entertained.
I discovered in a brief Google query about this film that it surprisingly sparked a lot of racial shizow in the good ol' United States of America. Maybe we're more progressive than them, or less concerned about bed-wetting in general, or whatever, but a lot of it was just "WTF?". I don't mean to sound weird when I say: This film is not in any way disrespectful towards our "proud white slave-owning ancestors". Typing that out almost makes me sick. Fuck 'em.
Who cares that the Klan was only actually started after the Civil War? I just sound like some freakish Klan-lover when I say that. Like I know too much. Who cares about the so-called "spaghetti-western" nature of this? "Quentin Tarantino has SO lost the plot with this, darling..." Seriously? Pulp Fiction was a realistic depiction of gangsters, right? Films were meant to: A) Entertain us. B) Be a historically-accurate record of whatever they depict. C) Be Sunday-afternoon entertainment after our "Driving Miss Daisy"-mornings. ? Hands up if you picked A)! I want your full names!
In a way, it's the most poignant and emotionally tangible film Tarantino has directed, and utterly brilliant. It's nothing less than I would expect from a matured person and, quite possibly, the most excellent and entertaining (our Word of the Day™) director of all time. I've previously tweeted (Boris1947) that it gets 18/21.
Comments
Post a Comment