OK- decent, but not great- overrated

Rating: 4/10 (6 July 2015)

This is an okay-decent movie. However, seeing its' place in the top 250, I kind of got my expectations up a little too high. It will not totally disappoint, but it is not one of the best movies of all time.
First off, surprisingly, this is a pure western. I was never a huge fan of pure westerns. That being said, as far as pure westerns go, this is in fact one of the better ones I've ever seen. The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly comes to mind as probably the best pure western I've seen so I can draw my comparisons from that. I also actually liked the Quick and the Dead, even though most critics didn't, and that's a modern classic western I can compare it with, which also stars DiCaprio. This movie has more substance to it than Quick and the Dead, but overall, it's not much different. If you do have a thing for westerns, then you will probably really like this movie.
There are some minor complaints in my opinion. Being that it is supposed to be a classic pure western type of movie, at times it felt like Back to the Future III in that the main character often acted like it was 2012 even though it was supposed to be the late 1800s. One scene that comes to mind is when he's wearing hip shades while they're traveling through the prairies to Candyland. A bigger example is how and why they chose to play rap music during some of the scenes, especially the gun battles. I found this silly and retractable from the setting of the classic old west. It was like a mixture of cultures and I really didn't like the choice as it almost ruined the setting in a way. What they should have done was just go with classic western music or basic suspenseful music. I don't like when modern movies do stuff like this. It ruins the authenticity a little bit and takes away from the quality and movie experience, especially when they used it in the climactic scenes and shootouts. Samuel L Jackson's character literally looked like an African American version of Biff on Back to the Future II. I was wondering why he looked so familiar and it finally hit me. BTTF III was more clearly stating that it was in fact a combination of 1990 and the late 1800s as far as blending the cultures of the protagonists with the setting; Django Unchained not so much. This was a flaw.
My other complaint about the film is that it was TOO LONG. Please, use some editing. They could have shaved off 10-15 minutes EASILY from this film just on long drawn out scenes like the trek through the country to Candyland and the drawn out sit down meetings consisting of heavy dialogue. It wasn't the dialogue that was the issue and I do like the added drama and pauses and suspense, but for a film to be this long due to extra drawn out scenes so much is unnecessary. How the entire final scene begins with Django talking the transporters into the bounty and letting him go was a little bit far fetched too, but Im not going to discredit it too much as the writing needed a device to get him back on the road to Candyland and this will do. My issue is that again, it just took way too long to get this final scene going; I would have rather had the major gun battle be the final scene and just have Django rescue his wife and blow the place up there- it would have saved another 20 minutes.
That being said, this was a very well acted and well constructed movie overall. Any time you have to recreate the old west, it's going to be a challenge, and for that I think they did a good job. Waltz was great again, and they had an all-star cast of supporting actors. This was some of DiCaprio's best work, but as I watched it, I really couldn't help but think to myself how much better his character would have been with Gene Hackman in that role. This is not taking anything away from Dicaprio's excellent performance, but I thought his character could come across a little more cruel if he wasn't so young looking. Still, Dicaprio pulls it off with flying colors.
The best scenes are in the beginning and middle. This movie is so long that it sets itself up on its' own to have very slow and boring parts that as I mentioned could have been edited to make the movie even better. Still, it makes up for much of its' flaws with its' dialogue, acting, cinematography, originality, and overall interesting story. It's an okay film but sloppy and silly, and not one of the best of all time.