Simple Compared to other Works by Tarantino

Rating: 9/10 (16 August 2015)

Tarantino may be well-known for his use of violence in the films he makes, but he is also great at creating complex relationships between characters and plots which need analysis, such as in Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction. With this film, it is pretty straightforward what the plot is: Schultz needs Django to identify and kill the Brittle Brothers and then he offers to help rescue Django's wife Broomhilda. This film is easier to follow than some of the best Tarantino films, which is good for enjoying the film but disappointing if you like Tarantino's complexity such as the out-of- chronology plot of Pulp Fiction.
However, one element that is maybe better in this film than some previous Tarantino works is the use of dialogue and monologues to create elaborate metaphors through their subtext, which is surprising because Tarantino has already proved to be a master of dialogue. The best scene of this film is probably when Calvin Candie (Leonardo DiCaprio) is presenting a skull of a slave to Schultz and Django and talking about dimples within the skull that represent a slave's submissiveness in order to illustrate that not just slaves, but all black people (including and especially Django) need to be put in their place. It is one of the best monologues written by Tarantino, and an accident on set made the scene even creepier: DiCaprio wasn't supposed to actually cut his hand in the scene by smashing a glass, and he wipes his actual blood on Broomhilda's (Kerry Washington's) face which elevates his menace to a whole new level. Other important dialogue in this film includes Schultz telling the legend of Broomhilda, racists complaining about the bags on their heads, and Schultz reflecting on what Alexandre Dumas would think of Candie's evilness.
While I'm happy that Christoph Waltz got another Oscar for a performance in a Tarantino movie, I'm a little surprised by this at the same time. Hans Landa was a much more complex character than Schultz, and Waltz rightfully deserved his Oscar for that role, but in this film, while some moments with Schultz were undeniably funny, all I saw was a bounty hunter with great diction and good wit from time to time. I'm not saying his performance wasn't good, but attempting to look at the film objectively, I don't see how Waltz should have necessarily been the front-runner for the Oscar.
I'm surprised that this film is ranked so highly on IMDb, seeing that my third favorite Tarantino film is Inglourious Basterds, but what I have to admit is that this is probably one of the funniest Tarantino films to date with many good moments where Schultz steals the scene and especially the scene with the racists complaining about bags on their faces. Even the most violent scene of the movie is funny at parts since a worker on Candie's plantation gets shot a ridiculous amount of times, sometimes by his dumb partners, and he lives longer than he should and keeps screaming and becoming more agonized throughout the shootout.
I generally really like this movie, but the third act is a little disappointing in my opinion, and I think Tarantino could have written the ending in a more satisfying way if it were close to or combined with the biggest shootout of the film. But then again, I guess an ending like that would have been too simple or would have seemed like a cop out. What Django has to say at the end of the film is pretty great though, and I wouldn't change that a thing about that, but towards the end of the film it seemed 20 minutes longer than it should have been.
A very good Tarantino movie (though when is he NOT good?), but not one of his best. But maybe I'm of that unpopular opinion because I have a bias towards Westerns? Who knows?
3.5/4.0