Quentin Tarantino is a case of arrested development at 12 who keeps on making revenge fantasy movies, my guess against bullies who picked on him as a child. This film is a combination of spaghetti western and blaxploitation. I know I am odds with others, but I don't find hearing the "N" word at least 100 times entertaining; watching two men fight to the death as "entertainment" (the hammer used to kill one of the two wrestlers); the murder of a black man by a pack of vicious dogs; constant whipping, etc., etc., etc. - and with all that said, my least favorite character, by far, was Django - he's supposed to be "hip" and manly and blah blah blah, but he's really just a despicable macho jerk. I was very disappointed by Leonardo Di Caprio's performance (I didn't see the last 40 minutes of the movie; I had enough of the constant violence).
I get that others just love guns, violence, the "N" word, and find it oh so funny when the Klu Klux Klan can't see through their sheets (hilarious - not!) - I get that others just love violence against others. Let's see: Aurora, Newtown, Columbine, drone planes murdering innocent children, women and men in countries we are not at war with - hmmm - could there be a connection? A society in love with violence can't quite reconcile the kharmic blowback that inevitably occurs.
Yes, this film is well-photographed; there is one interesting performance (Christoph Waltz); the music, while weird, has its moments - but that's it as far as I'm concerned.
Tarantino is always infuriating. If he could get away from his adolescent revenge violent fantasies he clearly has a knowledge of film history and has the money to hire fine movie technicians. But this film is a complete waste of time and money.
Did you really find all the violence "fun" to watch? It turned my stomach. Films I enjoyed had violent scenes in them but they did not glorify violence.
202 out of 458 found this helpful