Tarantino’s Django Unchained takes the shape of western spaghetti and adds to it a bit of a racial struggle during the year of 1858, just two years before the American Civil War. For me, the movie was all about something that Tarantino is just perfect at: the creation of tension and the always good mise-en-scène that makes us fly through cinema itself being attached to an old-style kind of movies with which Tarantino is familiar with – he tries to bring pop and mainstream references of other decades into something more deep and modern artistic.
Something about Tarantino is that for me he represents a new generation of movie fans, the ones that are affectionate to it in a different perspective from the other ones, more alternative, who would rather go to a cult session watch some old Fellini’s movie.I think that Tarantino does that because he wants to keep the distance between art and reality and that leads me to the next point of discussion.Although, Django Unchained is a representation of racial struggle in the South of USA in 1858, where slavery was still running as a normal thing, I would like to detached my perception of the critic historical episode that seemed to me as something that the director really wanted to show.
I say this because I know that a lot of people reacted to this movie either because they were white Americans or because they were Afro-Americans – I must admit that I find it interesting how Christoph Waltz’s character performs. Is the wise foreigner from Germany – good one to conciliate the fans from the Inglorious Bastard’s approach to Germany. But what I mean is that for me this was an episode contextualized and I don’t identify myself with any characters. I also believe that Tarantino was sensitive about the subject – as we know that America is sensitive about this black-white relation subject. In the past movies I saw girls getting bloody revenges (Kill Bill, Death Proof) or simply Nazis being insane, mafia serial killers, etc. This time, the historical approach is quite accurate in a lot of details and by that I don't mean the use of sunglasses but merely the historical contextualization of the previous civil war period.
Personally, I found this movie a lot of fun to watch, I loved how it played with the sound-track (I even recognized a song that was in Battle Royale) and I find the violence scenes very well conducted and balanced. I like the bloody style. It's not realistic, it's not suppose to be for him, that's how he distances reality from cinema. It's also his mark and it's what makes a lot of people hate him. I suppose we need to understand the spectacular part of the bloodbath as a cinema show. We know that people don't have such exaggerated blood squirt or as in one of the last scenes when the sister is projected into another room with a shot gun, it's like, what?! But still...
I liked the message, even if I usually don’t approve in realistic terms the will of revenge that is always in Tarantino’s work, but we know that this revenge works in a classical way of relieve that is really well done in this movie. I love the humour. Django’s character is a lot of fun, the love story, the good German the evil black butler – the good and the evil in human’s heart despite the color of the skin. Basically, a very good Tarantino’s. I missed you very much! Please come back again soon!
Here the original inspiration: