Django Unchained

I know I’m about to incur the wrath of many a film fan, but I have to be honest: Prior to Inglourious Basterds, I always felt Quentin Tarantino was overrated.

His proponents lavish praise on his dialogue and style, but I always saw through those trappings. Underneath all the endless talking and references to old movies, I never found any substance. What little plot his films had just seemed like ways to loosely tie together pieces of excess just for shock value, or to drop a lengthy dialogue exchange that has little or nothing to do with the story (I mean honestly, who cares what they call a Quarter Pounder in France?). For all the flash, his films were empty and shallow.

So what changed with Inglourious Basterds? For one, the film actually had a good plot. A purely fantasy plot, maybe (and one that notably alters history), but a compelling and interesting one. But moreover, instead of just aimless babble for dialogue’s sake, the extended exchanges between the characters actually had a point, subtly building tension in some scenes and making for offbeat humor in others. For all the bloody splatter on display, the movie was actually something close to sophisticated.

Well, sophisticated doesn’t exactly fit the description for Django Unchained. It’s a very brutal, bloody, messy picture, with more offensive content than you’d think Hollywood would allow these days. But along with the extreme excess, Tarantino again presents an interesting story, depicted with a style reminiscent of the Spaghetti Westerns of old. I must say, the director is starting to grow on me.

The time is just prior to the Civil War, when slavery was still rampant in the Deep South. Against this backdrop, German dentist-turned-bounty hunter Dr. King Schultz (Christoph Waltz) rescues the titular slave (Jamie Foxx) from a chain gang in Texas. In exchange for leading him to three fugitives, Schultz offers Django his freedom, and the two become partners in the bounty hunting trade.

Foxx adds a sort of blaxploitation twist to the laconic Man with No Name-like archetype, while Waltz is essentially a good-guy version of his charming but ruthless character in Inglourious Basterds (I got the feeling the character was made German just because Tarantino wanted to work with him again; fine by me, because he’s fantastic). The two play off each other well with quick wit while exhibiting all the qualities of classic Western antiheroes.

In fact, though ostensibly a tribute to old Westerns (the title character is even named after a character in several Spaghetti Westerns, one of whose portrayers makes a cameo), the picture actually stands on its own as a quality entry in the genre, with a few more modern touches. Still, the movie finds some time to humorously send up the genre (the most hilarious scene, featuring Don Johnson leading a dimwitted lynching party, is like a deleted scene from Mel Brooks’ Blazing Saddles). 

That’s about the first hour of the film. Then, the two leads travel to Mississippi and hatch a plan to rescue Django’s wife Broomhilda (Kerry Washington) from the suave, psychotic plantation owner Calvin Candie (Leonardo DiCaprio), and the tone changes in more ways than one. Here, Tarantino’s penchant for long exchanges of dialogue comes on display, and though some scenes go on a little long, they will please the filmmaker’s longtime fans. More noticeably, though, the picture takes a turn for the unpleasant in its unflinching depiction of slavery, and that’s an understatement.

The human bondage and racism on display is shocking. Not shocking like the uncomfortable feeling you get watching parts of Gone with the Wind in today's world, but turn-your-stomach shocking. In fact, it goes so far in depicting such brutality that it almost seems like it must be exaggerated. Maybe the things onscreen really did happen, and Hollywood has sanitized our vision of what slavery was really like. If that’s the case, Tarantino deserves credit for not holding anything back in depicting a cruel chapter in American history. But it seems like he's not so much trying to reflect the time as just be as mean and vile as possible.

This is especially the case with DiCaprio’s Candie, who crosses the line from a typical slave owner who sees people as property to a sadistic psychopath who takes pleasure in inflicting horrible pain. The actor’s obviously pushing to be as awful a human being as he can (so much that he actually comes to a point where it’s hard to take him seriously anymore because he’s just so over-the-top). The most offensive character, however, is Samuel L. Jackson as an aging house slave so broken that he’s arguably as bad as his master. It’s hard to tell if he’s trying to play it straight or an absurd caricature, as the character walks a razor-thin line being cruelly funny and incredibly sad. Either way, it’s appalling. Jackson deserves an Oscar just for the fearlessness in taking on the role.

So after describing all this unpleasantness, why am I recommending Django Unchained? Because all the racially obscene content makes the violent retribution—and it’s very bloody, indeed—all the more satisfying. Even the most politically correct pacifist viewer won’t be able to deny the basest pleasure in seeing such awful characters get theirs. This one requires a pretty strong stomach and even thicker skin, but for those with both, it's the feel good kill whitey movie of the year. If that statement offends you, see something else!

Best to Worst: Batman

The Dark Knight Rises, which was released to tremendous hype back in July, comes to DVD and Blu-ray today (read my full review). How does Christopher Nolan’s third and final Batman film rank among the others in the series? Here’s a look at the Caped Crusader on film (specifically live-action, full-length features; the many animated films could have their own list), from the highs to the lows.

The Best: The Dark Knight 

When it was announced that Heath ledger was playing the Joker, I was a little apprehensive at first, because he was more known as a romantic leading man at the time. My fears turned out to be unwarranted; the late Aussie was absolutely perfect. And so was the rest of the picture, elevating the comic book movie to a level of drama and craft that was unprecedented. This is the benchmark by which all comic book adaptations should be measured.

Batman Begins

Hard to believe it now, but prior to Nolan’s foray into the franchise, the Bat had fallen on some pretty hard times (more on that later). Even just an average flashy superhero action flick would have been an improvement. Instead, Nolan gave us the Batman movie we’d all been waiting for, sticking true to the comics while giving his own modern-day spin on the character’s origin, and casting a plethora of strong actors. Not only did this bring the series back from the dead, it  more or less started the "reboot", and several other series that had past their prime would follow in its footsteps and start fresh.

The Dark Knight Rises

It’s not without its flaws. There are a few too many plot points for even a two-and-three-quarter-hour movie, and some of them don’t work that well (and I personally would have liked to see at least one more movie in Nolan’s arc before he gave us an "ending" story). Also, Batman is out of action for much of it, leaving the hero duties to Gary Oldman's Jim Gordon and Joseph Gordon-Levitt's John Blake (both fantastic performances, by the way). Having said that, the movie is still highly satisfying, if just for the sheer bigger, better, brutal-er spectacle. If The Dark Knight was the series’ The Empire Strikes Back, this is a solid Return of the Jedi of a finale.

Batman Returns

This one seems to get a bad rap from some viewers. I can't explain why, because it’s actually the best of the pre-Nolan movies. True, the storyline about The Penguin (Danny DeVito) running for mayor of Gotham is ridiculous, but the film has more excitement than Tim Burton’s first entry. And while DeVito’s Penguin is quite different from the comics, he still creates a memorably creepy villain (and let’s face facts: The Penguin is a pretty lame character in the comics, anyway). Then there’s Michelle Pfeiffer’s Catwoman.

She's more than twice my age, but still....MEOW!

Batman

To be sure, this movie gets a lot of things about the Caped Crusader right. The look of Gotham City is the best of all the movies, and Danny Elfman’s score will always be the definitive Batman theme for me. There are also some very good individual scenes, such as the hero’s reveal early in the picture and the famous “mirror” scene. Yet, the film as a whole misfires, as Burton seems to be straining for dark comedy, and it just falls flat. Michael Keaton is good as Batman, but his scenes as Bruce Wayne romancing Vicki Vale (Kim Basinger), no so much. And Jack Nicholson seems less like the Joker than just typical manic Jack Nicholson, only in clown makeup.

The other Batman

A lot of people might not know this, but the 1960s TV show with Adam West and Burt Ward actually got its own big screen adaptation way back in ‘66. In this one, the Dynamic Duo takes on the all-star villain cast of the Joker (Cesar Romero), the Penguin (Burgess Meredith), the Riddler (Frank Gorshin), and the second of three Catwomen that this version of Batman would see (Lee Meriwether). If you can tolerate the incredibly campy tone, silly storyline, and bad puns, the picture can be enjoyed as kitschy comedy. Still, it’s more a historical footnote than a necessary entry in the evolution of the character on film. Even the lightest Batman comics were rarely this goofy.

The Worst: Batman Forever and Batman & Robin (tie)

The nipples! The horrible nipples!

Everyone seems to agree that Joel Schumacher’s run is the low point of Batman in cinema (Schumacher himself actually apologized...kinda). And yet, I’ll always have a soft spot for these two, as they were my first exposure to the character on film. That’s not to say they’re good, though; they’re every bit as silly, illogical, and badly acted as you’ve heard (though arguably so bad they’re funny).  

Which one’s worse?  Well, Batman Forever gave the world that Seal song. You can decide how that breaks the tie.