'Django Unchained' is 'Tarantino Unhinged'

Rating: 8/10 (7 February 2013)

This is a first impression review, after I've had a few days to think about the movie and work out what I liked and didn't like.
First off, this is a very enjoyable movie and I would highly recommend watching it unless use of the N-word in movies offends you! When off to watch a new movie by a writer/director of Tarantino's reputation and calibre, you're inevitably going to have certain expectations, and I'm pleased to say that Tarantino does not fail to deliver with his use of strong characters, great dialogue and well- placed laughs. If this movie is one thing, it's entertaining.
However, I left the theatre pretty confused, not because I didn't get the plot but because I really didn't get the point. I'm not saying that Tarantino's previous works are defined by some deeper meaning, but before this movie I would have described any of his pictures as being concise and polished, with a strong stylistic theme. 'Django Unchained', as stylish as it is in places, feels like a lot of really good ideas stapled together without much consideration for continuity. This effect was as evident in the music as it was in the cinematography, with very sudden changes from period pieces to contemporary Hip-hop. Although the combination of music and cinematography was largely very good.
The plot seems to be split into individual segments: the creation of Shultz and Django's partnership; the winter of bounty hunting; and then Candieland, with no overlap at all, and some events seem to occur simply for the purpose of a scene, such as when the KKK arrive to lynch the protagonists and have their (very funny) 'bag' scene. Their is no explanation for how Shultz and Django know they are coming, and the scene is of no relevance to plot, character-development, or later events. Additionally, Tarantino has outdone himself with his cameo role in this one. His cameos are typically bad, but this one is horrific! The whole scene with the three Aussies is very poor, made worse only by Tarantino's inability to act.
The other thing that hit me about this movie was the sense of characterture and over-the-top that seems to only grow throughout. Be it the use of a man named 'Candie' as the sugar-cane farming antithesis to the dentist, the amusing but certainly not stylish overuse of blood, to Django's final grin at the camera and ridiculous theme song, the film often feels like a parody, and I wonder if Tarantino just chose the slave-era south to enhance the movie's effect, rather than to make a point.
For all of the things that annoyed me though, DiCaprio and Waltz are fantastic in this movie and I enjoyed every scene which they share. Jamie Foxx was very good too as Django, but perhaps wasn't given enough good dialogue to shine. Samuel L. Jackson was very very funny as Stephen, the black butler who thinks he's white, but was unmistakably himself. At least his role was something new.
Overall it appears there is a lot to be said about this movie, which clearly makes it worth watching again and I imagine I'll appreciate some parts more when I do. I do however feel that with a more refined approach, the loss of some scenes and a greater sense of purpose this could have been quite a lot better. Whilst it's unmistakably Tarantino, 'Django Unchained' feels like 'Tarantino Unhinged'.