Movie Review: Django Unchained

Hey there, my fellow denizens of Chaos. I hope you've all had a great New Year, and that 2013 has been treating you right thus far. I'm back, as promised, with my review of Django Unchained. I have been a big Quentin Tarantino fan for years now. His movies are always unique, fun, action-packed, and even thought provoking in incredible, surprising ways. I absolutely love Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill. I am also a fan of other things that Tarantino has had a hand in (though he may not have directed), such as From Dusk Till Dawn and True Romance. However, Tarantino has missed for me before- Deathproof was simply not a good movie (though the chase at the end is really thrilling), and Inglorious Basterds, while good, didn't wow me the way other Tarantino films had. So- what would Django be? More Tarantino excellence, or another lesser effort? Let's find out...

You can stop reading after this paragraph if you want- this movie is simply AMAZING. This is both a return to form for QT, and also a bold new evolution that he seemed to be toying with in Inglorious Basterds, but has now perfected here. Django Unchained was one of the most interesting, involving, humorous, compelling, and emotional movie I have seen all year. And I've seen Avengers, Prometheus, Dark Knight Rises, Argo, and Lincoln- all strong movies, for one reason or another (not to say perfect- just they were compelling somehow, with some being stronger/better than others). Django may be the best all round movie this year.

I don't want to give too much away about the plot (as there are some surprises and twists). Basically, a bounty hunter from Germany King Shultz (Christoph Waltz), is trying to track a bounty, and the only one who has information about the marks whereabouts is a slave named Django (Jamie Foxx). Thus, King decides to track down Django, "acquire" him, and use him to find the bounty. However, Django has his own problems. Namely, as a slave, Django has been sold away from his wife, and he desperately wants to find her. King, a German immigrant who loathes slavery, strikes a deal with Django- if the slave helps King hunt his bounties, King will free him and then help him find his wife and free her. Of course, that's easier said than done, as she is owned by a cruel and malevolent slave owner, Calvin Candie (Leonardo DeCaprio), who owns many slaves, including Stephen (Samuel L. Jackson), who is unlikely to let her go.

That's all I want to give away about the plot. It's best discovered as an audience member, thrilling to the action, reversals of fortune, and the top-notch drama. The acting is fantastic. In fact, all 4 of the main stars are nothing short of phenomenal. In fact, if I cared about Oscar season at all, I'd say that it would be impossible to pick which should get it, as they are all deserving. Now, Daniel Day Lewis was great in Lincoln, as was Ben Affleck in Argo; however, the four leads here are nothing short of amazing. Foxx shows incredible range, starting off as a broken, beaten slave and growing into a free man, and ultimately hero. Waltz is a revelation here- he portrays his bounty hunter with such humanity, such empathy- an amazing bit of acting. DeCaprio plays against type as the villain, and he is damn good- totally loathsome and vile, and yet charming and intriguing (like the devil himself). Last, but not least, is Sam Jackson, giving a fantastic performance as a fellow slave. Jackson has become a "personality" which often eclipses his performances, but here he really, truly becomes his character, and I was awed by his transformation. I want to discuss on scene in particular where the acting is just transcendent, but I'll do that after my rating if you're interested or have seen it already.

Naturally, just about everything else is great about the movie. The actions scenes are great and very bloody. The camera work is beautiful, epic, and appropriate. The pacing is great throughout, until the very end, where it seems to drag just a bit (typical for Tarantino). The music is an odd mix (again, typical) but generally good. There's a lot of drama here, and everything combines to add to it. Finally, there's the issue of slavery and history itself. While this movie may not be "historically accurate" overall (there's no evidence of Mandingo fighting), however the movie displays the attitudes of the time well, including the little details. Indeed, it shows the complexities of slavery in a way few films have. See, in most movies, slaves are simply victims who need rescuing by noble northerners. However, in this case, African-Americans are empowered in various ways. They can fight back. They can learn and grow. They have hopes and dreams and fears. And some even take advantage of slavery to their own benefit (without giving it away, this is Jackson's character). The movie tackles slavery head on, but in an entertaining way. In fact, the movie is quite brave about it, pulling no punches and becoming subversive (taking on slavery AND how Hollywood and the popular consciousness has portrayed slavery) in the process.

As I said, I don't want to give anything away, so I'll stop here (unless you want one spoiler, after the rating). Suffice to say, this movie was simply amazing. I really can't wait to see it again. I don't have enough good things to say about it. If you love Tarantino, action movies, or just cinema in general, you can't go wrong with this movie. It is one of the best I've seen this year, and I wouldn't be surprised if it got Oscar love, as well as becoming a Tarantino perennial favorite. I give it 4 out of 4 Marks of Chaos.

So, until next time... (Unless you want 1 spoiler).







Still there? OK, so here goes. There was one scene in the movie which was absolutely, totally brilliant. One of the best scenes in a movie in years. Allow me to explain:

Shultz and Django have decided to pass themselves off as slavers, looking to buy slaves to fight each other for sport in order to get to Calvin Candie and rescue Django's wife. They are riding with Candie back to his plantation, when they hear the sounds of dogs barking. Candie stops to see the commotion, and discovers that one of his slaves has run away, and that the dogs and "poor white trash" taskmasters have tacked him down. Candie is furious, having paid a lot of money for this slave, and decides that he should have his dogs tear the slave apart. However, Candie is also doing this as he wants to "test" his new friends. The scene builds in tension. Candie is laughing at the prospect of his dogs feasting on a slave. The taskmasters want to "see a show". Meanwhile, Shultz is looking pained. He is a humane person, and he wants to save the poor slave. Meanwhile, Django is inexpressive. The tension builds, with the three main characters each having an agenda, but this slave is about to die. Finally, unable to sit and watch this atrocity, Shultz exclaims that he'll buy the slave. Candie thinks he's got him, but then Django says coldly- "No, you will not. We only want strong slaves. Kill him. We don't care". And with that, the slave is killed by the dogs. Why did Django do it? It wasn't that he didn't care- he did. He wanted to save that man. But, if he did, Candie would become suspicious, and they would not be able to locate his wife. Django hated doing this, but had no choice. The pain is hidden, but there nevertheless, Foxx being simply amazing at conveying this.

This scene is a marvel of modern film making.  The tension is built until it is unbearable. Each character has two levels to their thought. And there are lives at stake. Django must do the unthinkable if he is to save his wife, and the decision haunts him. And Waltz is an avatar for the audience, looking at this horrible crime, wanting to stop it no matter the cost, just as we surely would. Finally, DeCaprio manifests pure evil, sickening the audience and proving that he is a real threat. The audience is breathless the whole time. It is the most memorable scene in the movie (and there's LOTS of memorable scenes, to be sure), and an incredible piece of cinema. I was speechless after that scene, and I can say nothing better about a movie.

Movie Review (In Brief): Lincoln

Hey there Chaos fans! I know I've been away for a bit, but its because I've had a lot going on... I need a vacation! Haha! Anyways, I'll be posting this week with some pics from my emerging Khorne Bezerker force, and maybe a book review (I'm nearly done with Deliverance Lost too). However, I have a movie review for you, so without further ado:

It may or may not be a secret to longtime readers of this blog, but I am a history nut (that's what my wife calls me, at any rate). I love United States history, and I have admired Lincoln for sure. The truth is, I have been dying to see this movie, but I was also afraid. The cast sounded top notch (Lewis? Jones? Straithirn? What a cast!), and I was hoping that this movie would be smart and powerful, but I was afraid because Spielberg was the man behind the camera. At one point, Spielberg would have been a no brainer- giving us Indiana Jones trilogy, Saving Private Ryan, Schindler's List, Close Encounters, and of course, Jaws. However, he has been on a bit of a rough patch in the 21st century- I mean, he nearly ruined Indy with Crystal Skull, for heaven's sake! The war machines of War of the Worlds were fantastic, but the human element was all over the map (the audience I saw it with cheered- yes cheered- when Dakota Fanning was taken by the martians- that's how annoying she was). Minority Report was just OK, and AI was just a mess. Yes, so I had reason to fear with this- which Spielberg was going to show up?

Thankfully, there was nothing to fear here, as old Spielberg showed up and simply told a story. It is not a simple story by any stretch, but it was simply told, without schmaltz, fancy tech, or explosive action, or trickery. No, this story didn't need any of that- it just needed someone with courage to do the story justice, allowing it to develop at its own pace, and using the actors to their fullest. And thankfully, Spielberg and company did just that with "Lincoln". In fact, the movie is beautiful, elegant, meaningful, and even occasionally  humorous, while the acting is top notch all around.

The true success of the movie is its choice of scope. The movie is wise to focus in on one fight that Lincoln had to go through during the last days of the Civil War- a wider biopic would have diluted the proceedings. Just about everyone knows Lincoln as the the young "rail splitter", the Illinois lawyer, the "Great Emancipator" and as the president who put the Union back together; he is also tragically known as the first president to be assassinated. His whole life could be fodder for a movie, and I'm sure the temptation to do a sweeping biopic of his life would be there for any filmmaker. Instead of looking at Lincoln's whole life or even his actions in the four year Civil War, the movie focuses in on one particular legislative battle- the passage of the 13th Amendment, which would officially abolish slavery forever in all the United States. However bloody the Civil War was, it was this debate which would really decide the fate of the nation.

In history classes, students learn the basic cause of the Civil War is the conflict about slavery. This is both true but also misleading. The Civil War had many, many causes, with slavery as the underlying root. For some, the Civil War was a conflict between two different cultures (Industrial North versus Agrarian South), for others it was about the power of federal government as opposed to the states. For others still, it was seen as a war for "southern independence", while Northers felt the South had committed treason. Ultimately, not everyone was fighting over slavery, indeed at one point early in the conflict Lincoln had even gone so far as to say: "If I could save the Union without freeing any slaves, I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it, and if I could do it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that." That doesn't sound like the scourge of slavery, does it?

But, time changes things. Lincoln's views had evolved over the course of the war, and by the start of the movie (the last few moths of the war) he has come to see slavery for what it truly is: a cancer, a malignant growth that is killing our country- it has split us apart, and is anathema to our values as a republic. Lincoln can't "win" the Civil War unless slavery is destroyed. Bringing the union back together without ending slavery will only delay the inevitable- slavery again infecting our country and ruining/degrading our notions of freedom. With that in mind, Lincoln wants to create the 13th Amendment to the Constitution, which would ban slavery officially and forever in all the states, and he wants the House of Representatives to pass it BEFORE the war is over, as Lincoln knows that once the war is over and the southern states re-admitted, it will be virtually impossible to pass the amendment.

But even here, with all Northerners in Congress and a lot of anger with the South, Lincoln still faces stiff opposition. There are many in the Congress that don't support the amendment. There's Copperhead Democrats, who oppose everything Lincoln does. There's conservative Republicans who don't want to change things too much- they just want win the war and that's all. Then there's the Radical Republicans, led by Thadeus Stevens, who feel that the 13th Amendment doesn't go far enough- they want total racial equality immediately, and they think that Lincoln's is just a half measure. There's also congressmen who are racists, and there are some too scared to make such a change, or are more worried about being re-elected than doing the right thing. Basically, getting the required 2/3 vote to Amend the Constitution should be impossible.

The movie focuses on Lincoln's efforts to get the needed votes. The movie shows Lincoln making impassioned speeches, telling stories, using his personal charm to get the congressmen to vote yes. But, when those personal moves don't fly, Lincoln resorts to rather "questionable" tactics- including dolling out patronage jobs, bribes, lying to Congress, and even something that is basically blackmail. You know- just the usual horse trading and "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours" mentality that has always been present in our democratic republic. And it is thrilling to watch. Watching Lincoln (and his supporters, and his opponents, by the way) use every trick in the book is astonishing to see. The cajoling, threats, arm twisting, and near begging makes for great cinema as presented here- with so much at stake, you want Lincoln to pull it through, and every wavering Congressman matters. It is suspenseful, and it is a sign of a great movie that can make something so edge of your seat-worthy even though you already know the ending. Spielberg should get a ton of credit for letting the story develop naturally- there's no flashy editing, no rabbit pulled out of the hat tricks- he just lets the story breathe, and the tension increases as the drama winds its way toward the final voting date. You must admire the skill on display here, as so many movies might go in for the quick rush or the "Hollywood ending".

So, if the director is the first ace in the hole in this movie, choosing the right focus and allowing the events to play themselves out, the second ace is the acting. Indeed, every single actor brings their A game to this movie, and it boosts the whole proceeding from "great" to "awe-inspiring". First and foremost is Daniel Day Lewis as Lincoln. This performance is the closest we'll get to seeing Lincoln in motion, which is the highest praise I can give. Lewis' performance isn't caricature or impression- Lewis is doing his all to inhabit Lincoln, to make him a three dimensional human being- both a genius and a flawed human being, a fully rounded person that you feel that you know personally. Lewis makes Lincoln a hero, but not superman- he has great vision, but he makes mistakes. He is prone to depression (who wouldn't be if they were going through what Lincoln was going through). He loves to tell stories and jokes (often they have a point, but other times he's trying to cheer others or himself up). He loses his temper on more than one occasion. And Lewis gives everything he has to make it feel like Lincoln himself. If the concept of "Oscar worthy" matters to you, his performance IS of that level, and then some. He finds the perfect balance in that his Lincoln is the center of attention, but he never falls into the traps of scene-chewing or upstaging the other actors.

The whole cast is amazing. Each actor has, like Lewis, given their all to inhabit their character rather than simply act. Tommy Lee Jones gets the best laughs, but also the most complexity (besides Lincoln) as Thaddeus Stevens, a cranky Radical Republican who ironically holds the key for Lincoln's victory. Jones' portrayal allows us to see a bitter, cynical man who wants to do the right thing, but also can't help but rub people's faces in his own superiority- a brilliant politician, but also an ass. David Straitharin is William Seward, Lincoln's upright and straight laced Secretary of State who must get his hands dirty in Lincoln's stead to get the bill passed. Sally Field really makes us feel for Mary Todd Lincoln, who has great mental and personal troubles of her own, and lays them at her husband's door at the most difficult of moments. James Spader gets some great laughs as a "political operative" brought in to "change" the minds of some congressmen- his four letter word upon seeing Lincoln for the first time is a riot. Lee Pace provides the opposing views in the form of congressman Wood, a New York Democrat that vehemently fights against the Amendment. There's others, to be sure, as the whole cast is worthy, and all add to the incredible whole.

I'm going to stop here, as this is supposed to be a brief review. In summation, if you like history, you owe it to yourself to see this movie, which shines a provocative light on a great man and a great conflict. If you enjoy movies, you should see this, as it is really 1st rate film making (its great that we got Lincoln and Argo in one year). I give it 4 out of 4 Marks of Chaos.

Until next time...

Movie Reviews In Brief: Argo and Silent Hill 2

Well, well, well... look who's here: my fellow Chaotic brethren! Welcome to another edition of the Chaos Corner! I just bought the newest White Dwarf, and it continues the changes that have been put in place with the last issue. It's really solid, though it has more fantasy than 40K (to be expected, but I'm only a 40K player). There's a few painting and conversion articles, a section about terrain, two interviews with Black Library authors, and a lot more. All they have to do is have some small fluff/fiction, and it'll be perfect.

Anyways, I haven't had a chance to go to the movies, due to my illness. The last movie I saw was The Dark Knight Rises. I will review that after I get it on Blu Ray, as I was getting sick when I saw it, and I was just too tired to do the review. Besides, seeing it on Blu before review will give me a chance to really dissect the themes, as well as it's flaws. At any rate, I've only just now been able to go back to the movies again (though I missed some good ones like Looper). So, I've seen 2 movies now: Argo and Silent Hill 2. I'm going to briefly review both. One is excellent, the other... hehe, not so much.

So let's take a look:

Argo

I saw this one with my wife. I have never been a big fan of Ben Affleck (he was the bomb in Phantoms... ;-). His performances have ranged from just OK to truly, truly awful (Pearl Harbor, anyone?). However, his acting and direction of The Town was just great- a solid, suspenseful crime drama. Well, he's back with Argo, which takes place during the Iranian Hostage Crisis. The movie is based on an actual event, and the movie only takes a few "artistic liberties" with the events, which is even more amazing. Basically, a few Americans escaped the Iranians who attacked the US embassy, but their still stuck in Tehran. If they are discovered, they will be executed as spies. With the clock ticking, one CIA operative comes up with a plan: he's going to disguise himself as a Hollywood producer, go in with fake papers, get the Americans and pass them off as his movie crew, and then escape. To make it convincing, he enlists Hollywood guys to really sell a fake movie to the press, the "science fiction epic-- Argo".

Sound far fetched? Haha! That's the point- its a scheme that's just crazy enough to work. It is a true story. The CIA actually did this, in 1980. This isn't Hollywood- this is an intersection of entertainment and real life. That's what makes this story so fascinating. Even better, Affleck does a great job of making this a thrilling, energized, suspenseful, and even humorous movie. The movie simply sizzles every second- the stakes are high, and you can't help but be on the edge of your seat- can they pull of this crazy rescue? Affleck makes sure that the tension is ever-present, but he's not afraid to let the absurdity of the plan shine through- the humor that occurs as these guys put together this fake movie is just great. Alan Arkin, as a Hollywood mogul, in particular, is a blast ("Argo fuck yourself" is something I now say, its such a great line).

Since this is a review in brief, I don't want to give it all away. I will say that the movie works on so many levels, it is a bit of a wonder. There's a lot of Oscar talk about this movie (IF that's important to you), but its easy to see why. This is an great suspense/thriller, but with a sense of humor AND it is historically "accurate"- it mixes together such disparate parts and makes them into a hugely effective combination, and you can't get better than that. I give it 4 out of 4 Marks of Chaos.

Silent Hill 2: Revelations

I have played Silent Hill games before (The videogame Silent Hill 2 is one of my favorite games of all time- this movie is NOT based on it though). I have also seen the first Silent Hill movie. That movie is perhaps the best video game adaptation ever put to film (not saying much when you see movie like Doom and Super Mario Brothers as the competition). That movie was a solid horror movie in its own right, but it happened to be based on the game. The images were right out of the game, as were its themes of religious persecution and hysteria. The actors all did a great job, and the effects were top notch.  Best of all, the movie had some scares, and it had a foreboding and nightmare like quality. It was even occasionally unsettling. It had flaws, but it was an entertaining horror movie.

Unfortunately, Silent Hill 2 has none of those things going for it, really. I saw this with my brother yesterday (he's a die-hard fan of the games), and I was very disappointed. I wanted to like this movie, and there were MOMENTS where I thought it was going to get its act together, but it never quite did. Basically, in my mind, it seemed as if the creative team LOVE the games, but didn't know what to do with it. They didn't know how to make a movie out of the games. It is basically the plot of the 3rd game, with several key differences. However, the core problems were the poor writing and lack of tension.



The movie lacks all the things that made the first one good (or indeed, anything that makes for a horror movie). There is no sense of dread, fear, or horror. The movie lacks any tension whatsoever. The script is filled with bad dialogue and double talk about cults that really go nowhere (and don't make much sense). However, the chief sin is that you're never afraid for the characters- you never feel like any of the characters are in danger. You simply can't have a horror movie where there is no sense of threat to the heroes. In this movie, that just never happens- the suspense is never built up. If you fail to have that, the movie must fail, and this one does.

It does have a few things going for it, though, which only made the disappointment worse. The creature effects were still top notch. There were some unsettling glimpses at these hell spawn (the spider made out of child doll parts was a particular standout, while Pyramid Head still is great looking) but again, without tension, the creatures just don't scare. The actors TRY to do their job, with the actress playing Heather, in particular trying her best, but the script and direction manage to ruin her conviction. Solid actors like Sean Bean, Malcolm McDowell, and Carrie Ann Moss are wasted, relegated to cameos, and again saddled with bad lines.

Again, if the movie had scares, a lot could be forgiven. Since this is a horror movie, the fact that there are no scares, no dread, no tension... well, that makes this movie a failure. Its a shame, as the first one was good, and there was potential here for a solid sequel. Unfortunately, the filmmakers squandered all those positives, making a mess and, quite probably, killing the franchise. Silent Hill could have been an anthology series, but now, if there is a sequel, it will be of the Direct to DVD bargain bin. That is a real shame. I give this 1 and a half out of four Marks of Chaos.

So, if you want to see a great movie, see Argo, as you won't be disappointed. As for Silent Hill 2- if you MUST see it, wait till DVD or Netflix. My brother liked it, but even he as a huge fan of the series could see it's flaws.

Until next time everybody!!