Tag Archive: Samuel L. Jackson


Django UnchainedBy now, you pretty much know what you’re going to get with a Quentin Tarantino film.  There will be blood, violence, swearing and snappy dialogue, it will probably be a bit too long, and there will be some cool (or at least, what Tarantino thinks is cool) music on the soundtrack.  So it’s no surprise that Django Unchained has plenty of all of these things, some of which work, some of which don’t, but for the most part they do, and Django Unchained is Tarantino’s best film in a very long time.

Django is the name of Jamie Foxx’s slave, a man being marched across the country on a chain gang in 1858, when the men leading them meet Dr. King Schultz (Christoph Waltz, following his turn in Inglourious Basterds with another excellent performance) , who is interested in ‘acquiring’ Django.  Although he is willing to negotiate a price with the men, he ultimately acquires Django by shooting one of them, while shooting the horse of the other, and taking Django away with him, leaving the surviving man to the mercy (or not) of the other slaves.  Schultz tells Django that he is a bounty hunter, and needs Django’s help to track down the Brittle brothers, three men with a lucrative bounty on their heads.  After they track the men down, Django tells Schultz that he is married, and is searching for his wife after they were split up because they tried to escape from their master together.

That leads Django and Schultz to CandieLand, home to Leonardo DiCaprio’s Calvin J. Candie, where Django’s wife Broomhilda (Kerry Washington) is now a slave, working under the tyrannical eye of Stephen (Samuel L. Jackson), where they hope to secure the release of Broomhilda while posing as two men hoping to become involved in the Mandingo fighting business.

When I was younger, I was a huge fan of Tarantino’s work; his films were cool, violent and edgy, and as I was a teenager when they came out, the dialogue from his films was often quoted and his films, Pulp Fiction in particular, watched regularly.  But I’ve gone off him recently, and from Kill Bill vol. 1 onwards, haven’t really enjoyed any of his films.  I like Kill Bill vol. 2 better than the first, but rarely watch either; I had Death Proof on DVD but never watched it again after seeing it in the cinema (Planet Terror, the Robert Rodriguez half of their Grindhouse collaboration is much better); and Inglourious Basterds had a brilliant opening scene but lost me very quickly.  I still believe that Reservoir Dogs is his greatest film (although you could argue that True Romance has his greatest script), but before seeing Django Unchained, I wondered if I could ever really enjoy a Tarantino film again.

But I did enjoy Django Unchained a lot more than I had expected to, although there are elements of it that I didn’t like, mainly because they are the things that are often very bothersome about Tarantino movies.  The biggest problem is the length of the film; at around 2 hours and 45 minutes, it’s at least 30 minutes too long, and there are a few scenes that are either unnecessary, or could just be trimmed down (particularly the scene at the end featuring Tarantino with a laughably poor Australian accent).  The music doesn’t really work either, with most of the songs (Tarantino doesn’t do scores) clashing with the period the film is set in.  A score is supposed to compliment what is happening on screen, most of the songs Tarantino picks do the opposite.

Neither of those are huge problems; they affected my enjoyment of the film a little, but not enough to make me dislike the film.  Two things that didn’t bother me about the film were the levels of violence and the frequency with which pretty much every character on screen says nigger.  These are both things that Tarantino has been questioned extensively about in the past (and recently too, as his interview with Krishnan Guru-Murthy showed.  Oh, and on that subject, I think Tarantino was talking out of his arse about the importance of his film in reference to slavery but that he was right to reject Guru-Murthy’s question about violence in his films because he’s been answering that question for 20 years, and I also think that Samuel L. Jackson was right to respond to that question about the ‘N-word’ in the way that he did too), but have never really bothered me.  His films are almost always violent, but usually not quite as graphic as you think they are, and Django Unchained, while very bloody, is no more graphic than any of his previous films.  His use of that word in his scripts has always been a more thorny subject, but he’s never written about nice people, the kind of people he writes about are not concerned about political correctness, they usually kill and rob people, and if you lived in that world you probably wouldn’t say ‘Actually, African-American is the polite way to describe black people’ very often.  In Django Unchained, it feels somewhat redundant to complain about the frequency of its appearance in the script, because that is how people would have talked in that era.  Black people were definitively treated as a lesser people, so it’s not like Calvin Candie wouldn’t use the word frequently when talking about slaves or Mandingos.

In fact, I think you can make a convincing case that Tarantino does a good job of using the word in this script; especially in the way Jackson’s abhorrent Stephen uses it.  He’s in something like a position of power within Candie’s world; Candie is still his master, but he’s treated better than other slaves and has a power over them (and they are definitely terrified of him and what he is capable of), and he looks at Django with distain, incredulous that Django is being treated better than how even he thinks black people should be treated (for example, he can’t believe that Django is allowed to stay in Candie’s house).

Jackson’s performance stands out amongst the four leading men as the best in the film, although DiCaprio gives him a run for his money, portraying Calvin Candie with an omnipresent quiet menace that explodes in a furious rage when he realises the true nature of Django and Schultz’s plan.  Waltz was, by far, the best thing about Inglorious Basterds, and he’s just as good in this film, while Jamie Foxx does good things with a character that feels slightly underwritten (Kerry Washington is also a good actress, but Broomhilda is definitely underwritten, leaving her with little to do other than be terrified and abused).

So for me, Django Unchained represents something of a return to form for Quentin Tarantino.  It’s not his best film, but it is significantly better than anything he’s done since Jackie Brown, and while it’s too long, there are great performances to keep your interest throughout its hefty running time.  This is not Tarantino at his best, but something close to his best is more than good enough.

@TheGlassCase

Okay, first things first.  Avengers Assemble sets a VERY high bench mark for 2012 blockbusters.  The likes of Prometheus, The Dark Knight Rises and The Amazing Spiderman have enough hype surrounding them as it is, but Joss Whedon’s Marvel extravaganza gives the producers of those movies a lot to think about.

Whedon has already produced one of the movies of the year with The Cabin In The Woods, but the sheer size of Avengers Assemble is a daunting task to take on, but Whedon has absolutely nailed it.  This movie instantly catapults itself into the reckoning amongst the greatest superhero movies ever made, no mean feat when you consider the size of the movie, and that’s in terms of budget, ambition and cast.  Because this is a movie with a very strong (and very big) cast, all of whom need to have substantial amounts of screen time, without slowing the pace of the movie and sucking the excitement out of it.

This is something that Whedon has handled extremely well.  The movie begins with Thor’s (Chris Hemsworth) bitter and angry brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) stealing an energy source known as ‘the tesseract’ (although it could just as easily be called the Macguffin), as well as Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner) and Dr. Erik Selveg (Stellan Skarsgård reprising his role in Thor) from Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) and S.H.I.E.L.D.  He has plans to conquer and rule Earth, and as the title of the movie suggests, Fury is forced to reactivate the ‘Avengers initiative’ and sends Agent Coulston (Clark Gregg) and the Black Widow, Natasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson) to bring Captain America (a freshly thawed Chris Evans), Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr), Bruce Banner aka The Incredible Hulk (not Eric Bana, not Edward Norton, but Mark Ruffalo) and Thor together to save humanity.

That leads to an awful lot of ego all in the one place, and it’s no surprise when the newly formed team doesn’t gel immediately.  Thor in particular is less than happy, and wants Loki to return to Asgard rather than be killed or held on Earth.

And that’s about as much of the plot as I care to reveal.  I could probably get away with saying more without straying into dangerous spoiler territory, but while Avengers Assemble is a great movie, it doesn’t take a genius to work out where the plot goes.  So without saying more about the plot, I’ll concentrate on the writing.

With so many characters so heavily involved in the film, it would be easy for Whedon to sideline a few of them, and give all the action and dialogue and hero shots over to one or two.  But this is not the case in Avengers Assemble, and everyone gets plenty to do.  The film has all the action and drama you’d expect from a superhero movie, but is also consistently hilarious, with lots of memorable lines and moments for almost every character.  As we know from his own movies, Tony Stark is the most sarcastic superhero of all time, but he’s not the only one with sharp wit and comic timing.  Whedon’s script is smart, funny and most importantly, never boring.  The film may be almost two and a half hours long, but it never drags and while there’s many dialogue-heavy scenes, they never last too long before something BIG and EXCITING happens.

The acting is great across the board too.  Mark Ruffalo is the only newcomer to the Marvel universe, replacing Edward Norton as Bruce Banner, but gives a quietly assured (except when he’s massive and green, obviously) performance as the highly intelligent physicist.  You know what you’re getting with the rest of the cast, having seen their characters in their own movies already, and all of them play it straight, avoiding the hammy histrionics that could easily come while playing superheroes, gods or giant green angry monsters.  There are no complaints on the CGI front either, with everything looking spectacular and the set pieces are huge and hugely impressive.

So all this makes Avengers Assemble the first must-see movie of the year.  It will make huge amounts of money worldwide, and with every character capable of carrying a movie on their own, you can expect to see a lot more of the Avengers, alone or together in the next five years.  Blockbusters don’t get much bigger (or better) than this.

@TheGlassCase