Tarantino once again gives us an instant classic

Rating: 9/10 (18 February 2013)

Quentin Tarantino has become famous for his unique direction, his love of violence and his dramatic, controversial style of screenplay writing; his latest film, "Django Unchained", is no exception.
The film's feel of a classic "spaghetti Western" is clear, with the first town scene looking just like it could have come out of a 1960s Marlon Brando epic, but also combines the angles and camera style that we are used to from a Tarantino film. The aesthetics make it very pleasant to the eye, but the film never becomes stale or lulls you into a false sense of security - just when you least expect it, a sudden zoom or unexpected angle puts you on the edge, making you focus again on what is going on on screen, and more importantly the issues it is exploring. My favourite example of this was when the camera quickly zooms to a close up on DiCaprio when we first see his face, highlighting both the importance of this character but also making the audience disorientated slightly, as the majority of the film has been slow or static before, allowing the audience to mentally shake themselves and focus harder on the picture.
The film explores the theme of slavery greatly throughout, with surprising and shocking historical accuracy. The racism is harsh, with the word "nigger" being used over one hundred times, by both blacks and whites, leading to great controversy throughout the world. "We don't use the word any more than it would have been used in 1858 in Mississippi" Tarantino has said, which is very true; a film set in a certain period exploring certain issues has to come with certain baggage,and obviously language is one. You wouldn't make a World War Two film without using the word Nazi, would you? This for me makes the film very successful, and in my opinion good cinema has to create discussion, which this film certainly does. I went to see "Lincoln", where I saw, amongst other things, the use of the word "nigger". Just because it's used less than in "Django Unchained", why should that make it any less "shocking" or "acceptable"? Important questions that need to be discussed, and ones that Tarantino is keen to explore.
The film also is extensively violent, with the death count off the scale and the levels of blood great. For me however, I think that the outrage of it in this film is rather unfounded, and that it is nothing, compared to say, the final fight scene in "Kill Bill: Vol 1". When Tarantino shows violence it is always slightly comic, especially if it is a quick death or if he doesn't want to draw much attention to it - whilst shooting their bounty, Schultz and Django create a vast spurt of the red stuff and the body hits the ground. Laughable, silly, and not greatly scarring or terrible. However, what Tarantino also does in this film is brutally show violence that would have happened to blacks all over America in this time period. When we see a terrified Mandingo fighter in a tree surrounded by dogs, we know that probably happened thousands of times. When Tarantino slowly and methodically shows us his limbs being torn from him by the dogs, we know that this violence would have been every day for the slaves on these kinds of plantations. To me, this violence is once again part of the "baggage" that comes along with both the subject and with a Tarantino film, so if you're offended by it you only have yourself to blame; it's not as if Tarantino isn't famous for violent films, is it? To go back to "Lincoln", although there is not as much violence as in "Django Unchained", the two films deal with similar issues, and at the start of "Lincoln" we see bayonets piercing the heart and lungs of soldiers. Just because there isn't a spurt of scarlet doesn't make it any less violent; it seems that blood is the deciding factor to if a film is a 12a or an 18, or as some have called "Django Unchained", "unclassifiable".
Overall, "Django Unchained" is a thought-provoking, highly original and fantastic work of cinema. As one critic has said, "it has something for everyone to hate", but I feel it also has something for everyone to love. The acting, cinematography and direction is superb, and with the box-office numbers to back it up, it is easy to say that this film is one of Tarantino's greatest. The script won the "BAFTA Award for Best Original Screenplay", and it is easy to see why gained and how deserving of such an accolade it is. Although being rather long (2 hours 45 minutes), I never felt that there was anything unnecessary in the picture. Although some parts were grinding on my human morals and difficult to watch, I feel that these all added to the intense and overall feel of the film, and for me it has made it an instant classic and one of my new favourite films.