Django Unchained

Try not to keep up with the number of N words in this film. You will lose count.

But how can you not expect that from Quentin Tarantino? Such is one of many cases that makes "Django Unchained" especially more interesting to review. Like "Pulp Fiction" and "Inglorious Basterds", this film follows an unorthodox path of storytelling and a bold mission to buckle down on a controversial topic: slavery in the United States. 2 years before the Civil War, Django (Jamie Foxx), a slave, is approached by an unusual German bounty hunter (Christoph Waltz) who seeks the whereabouts of the Brittle brothers. Together, they travel throughout the South to hunt down the Brittle brothers and other most-wanted criminals. It was not everyday that a black man waltzed down the streets of Texas on a horse in 1858. Anyone with a sliver of knowledge in American history understands how abnormal or even blasphemous of a sight that would be.

For Tarantino, abnormal is what he does best. Thus, we have "Django Unchained": a wholly inaccurate but triumphant amendment of history, where the oppressed gloriously destroys the oppressors. Although such gratification never actually transpired, the adventure where a black slave exterminates white criminals for a living is comparable to the heroics of a Jewish soldier personally gunning down Adolf Hitler in his own film screening event. However, "politically incorrect" might just be the perfect phrase to describe "Django Unchained". Offensive language, imprecise historical portrayals and violence beyond tolerance are the side effects of this epic journey. Likewise, unveiling and explicitly reminding people of a dark past can be a major hit to the nation's pride and indubitably discomforts those who have been directly or indirectly affected by the account. But the way that Tarantino shapes the narrative into something so melodramatic and overblown yet still retain the weighty ambiance of slavery is a sight to behold. Some may feel belittled by the "caricature", while others may feel satisfied by the heroic fantasy. Every film has and will have its own set of contentious headlines, but Tarantino deserves credit for tackling the perhaps the greatest controversy in American history.

It is a persona of Tarantino to use unconventional methods of production. At times, certain transitions between scenes feel awkward and tonal shifts can seem drastic, though these are eccentric stylistic choices that don't severely impede the experience. In fact, they are what make Tarantino's works so distinguishable from other mainstream films. The only personal qualm is the running time, amounting to nearly 2 hours and 45 minutes. Firstly, the main benefit of a long film goes back to the old saying: "the more, the better". The more people get to indulge on an all-star cast consisting of Jamie Foxx, Christoph Waltz, Leondardo DiCaprio, and Samuel L. Jackson, the more gratifying it is especially for fans, to the point of being spoiled. Also at times, the film certainly did not feel like 3 hours; the pacing is proficiently manipulated and in general, the story is highly intriguing, thanks to Tarantino's savvy. As far as the acting goes, DiCaprio staying in character for a solid 10 minutes after legitimately injuring his hand with blood gushing out is all you need to know. Otherwise, it is a delight witnessing these talents come together at one setting and we certainly get nourished like at a grandmother's dinner table.

Unfortunately, the flip side of a long running time is the intimidation factor. No matter how talented the cast is or how creative Tarantino can be, I had to slightly force myself to watch "Django Unchained" just because it was nearly 3 hours. While "Django Unchained" is praiseworthy at many areas, it is not at the level of other comparably long films such as "Pulp Fiction", "The Wolf of Wall Street" or "The Revenant". Unless it is the newest Avengers installment or a historically famous title, there is little to no reason as to why I should commit 3 hours of my time towards a decent film. Had "Django Unchained" been just a bit over 2 hours, the high "rewatchability" would allow me to revisit and appreciate it more. At least for me, I would need a second viewing to realize the values of this film, but only a legendary title is worth another 3 hour commitment. A decent film that is too long becomes a commitment instead of a leisure activity. This is an unbearably petty thing to pick out from a Tarantino title, but also a peculiarly irksome point that even I am new to and frankly, shouldn't deter other people's opinions. But ultimately, there is a plethora of Hollywood talents that greatly amplify the delivery of "Django Unchained", along with Tarantino's signature eccentricity. Some people may be bothered by the controversial theme while others may simply don't dig the style. But a score of Super 8 for a film that I thought was decent among Tarantino's masterpieces should put many unaware people on notice.

Impersonation on point.