Starts off great, but turns Tarantino

Rating: 7/10 (31 January 2016)

So this movie starts out great like a lot of Tarantino films, and unfortunately, turns out the same as all Tarantino movies. With the exception of "True Romance" which Tarantino did not direct, and in which Scott had to beg him to change the end, all Tarantino movies seem to be excuses to make actors say the word "nigger" and have a bloodbath. I'm going to focus on the first half of the movie, because that is where all the good is. Good casting, great acting, and good location and cinematography. This dialogue felt kind of period-authentic, but accents could have been better. The period after the US civil war must have been one of turbulence and conflict. Tarantino uses this well. Its a fascinating time in history and a good script about what that time may have been like. I found Samuel Jackson's 1/2 way point monologue personally disgusting and had to debate whether or not I would keep watching. I did for better or worse and did get rewarded with a resolution to a well thought out mystery for the characters and audience alike, but it came with a price. As I first stated, this movie devolves into the typical Tarantino bloodbath. Just once I wish the guy could piece together an original ending to one of his otherwise brilliant scripts.