"Django Unchained," Tarantino Indulged

One thing I've got to say I appreciate being about being an Asian-American movie lover is that I don't have any kind of personal baggage when it comes to the touchy subject of the historical persecution of African-Americans. From my perspective, "Django Unchained" is just Quentin Tarantino paying homage to the Western genre, particularly the more violent, more stylish, and more morally unequivocal Italian imports nicknamed the "spaghetti Westerns." It is also another revisionist tale, like "Inglorious Basterds," that allows the audience to enjoy in the catharsis of watching a historically persecuted group to take revenge on their oppressors.

In this case, the plight of the black slaves in the pre-Civil War South are embodied by Django (Jamie Foxx), who we first encounter after he and his wife Broomhilda (Kerry Washington) have been punished for trying to run away by being sold at auction to different buyers. Django is soon rescued by Dr. Schultz (Christoph Waltz), a German bounty hunter who needs Django's help to identify his next targets. Schultz and Django eventually become friends and partners after Django proves to be a natural at bounty hunting. They discover that Broomhilda has been purchased by a Mississippi plantation owner named Calvin Candie (Leonardo DiCaprio), a colorful sadist with a particular interest mandingo fighting slaves.

"Django" takes place in a ludicrous, almost cartoonish universe filled with wild, larger-than-life characters and endless references to other films. For fans of Tarantino, it will not be unfamiliar. As you might imagine, the violence is brutal and graphic, the villains are vile and despicable, and nothing is held back in the name of good taste or racial sensitivity. Could this be a Quentin Tarantino film if anything were? You might be aware of the controversy over the abundant usage of the N-word in the script, or the gruesome scene of a man being torn apart by dogs, or the appalling Stephen (Samuel L. Jackson), Calvin Candie's loyal head slave. Does the context of an alternate history Tarantino-ized version of the American South make a difference?

The trouble is that this time out, the shocks and the splatter have largely become expected. The occasional use of contemporary music on the soundtrack doesn't come across as particularly daring or original. Django's sentiments toward "white folk" don't sound as subversive as they may have in the past. Even the homages are easy to see coming, and feel compulsory to some degree. Franco Nero, for instance, played the title character in the original 1966 "Django," and he shows up for a scene where it is obvious that he's only there as a hat tip to older film for the cinema nerds in the audience. Tarantino's references have generally been more creative than this, or at least a little more subtle.

What's worse, "Django Unchained" has more fundamental flaws. The 165 minute running time easily could have lost 30 minutes of material. The pace is uneven, losing a lot of momentum after the first hour that follows Django and Dr. Schultz's early adventures together. Never have the random cameos by actors like Jonah Hill (as KKK Bag Head #2) and Zoe Bell (as one of six "Trackers") stuck out so oddly. And never has it felt like some of Tarantino's stylistic choices were made simply to satisfy particular longstanding habits. His usual pairing of horrific violence with farce and humor doesn't work as well or as often this time, because some of the content is simply too thematically dark and viscerally cringeworthy to overcome.

On the other hand, "Django Unchained" is extremely strong as a revenge narrative, and the characters are wonderful. Tarantino does a great job of getting us invested in Django's quest to rescue his wife, his friendship with Dr. Schultz, and his transformation from helpless slave to righteous man of action. The performances are very good, and I expect to see Christoph Waltz and Leonardo DiCaprio in contention for trophies at awards time. Maybe Jamie Foxx too, based on the strength of his final few scenes. When you take the high voltage nature of the director into account, Tarantino's constant focus on the most depraved aspects of slavery do not seem especially egregious. I can understand the sensitivity to seeing some of the bloodier and more racially charged events up close, but I never thought that Tarantino went too far at any point. The more extreme content served to make slavery look more perverse, and not in any kind of fetishistic or degrading way.

Of course I'm not black and couldn't possibly understand the African-American viewpoint, but I'm not looking at this from the white perspective either, so I'm as close to a neutral POV as you're likely to get. What I am is a Tarantino fan, and I'm sad to say this is not one of his better films. And yet, there's no denying that "Django Unchained" is frequently entertaining. As always, it is deeply satisfying to see all the baddies get their comeuppance in the end with maximum force. Even if I don't think it works on a more highbrow level, it's perfectly true to the B-movie spirit that spawned it. And at its core, it's a bloody good time, and that's what I've ultimately decided to treat it as.
---