Copious amounts of fake blood, controversial topics, and Samuel L. Jackson, and voilá, you’ve got a Quentin Tarantino film. Add a damsel-in-distress plot stationed in the old and you have Django: Unchained. These themes have been done so many times that they shouldn’t work, and yet they do, as the 88% on Rotten Tomato confirms. The film progresses in a predictable manner that, rather than bored the viewer, has them holding their breath, hoping that what they think happens, happens. How is this accomplished? Well, there’s a formula.
There’s a buildup of suspense and then a release. The buildup, of course is a very easy thing to establish in a movie about that specific time period, in that specific region. Slavery and racism are two entwined …show more content…
As with the first half of the movie, they were one step ahead of their foes, with the German’s skills in conning people, and the protagonist with his knowledge of the South. They were one step away from their goal when Old Man Carrucan smells foul play and tells Monsieur Candie. This is where Samuel L. Jackson comes in. The scene that plays out afterward is chilling. Candie walks into the dining room with a skull and a knife in tow. The cinematography in this scene is interesting. The camera is often on Candie and his lawyer, with the back of Dr. King Schultz’s head on the right side of the screen. Every once in a while, the camera cuts back to show Django’s expression, the realization that the scam had failed. This implies that, though he now knows that they were only there to save Django’s wife, Candie is addressing the German doctor more than he is the protagonist. That he still considers Django subhuman and less guilty than the white man who must’ve put all of those destructive ideas in his head. The rest of that scene is unsettling, as Broomhilda is forcefully dragged into the room. When Candie negotiated and sells her for a ridiculous price, he slams the hammer; previously used to dislodge the skull, right next to her head and yells, …show more content…
Would Django even be there if Dr. Schultz hadn’t taken him in and convinced him that he could free his wife? Was he anything without the experienced bounty hunter? This is addressed after the German dies abruptly and Django is sent away to work at a mine with a reputation for working its slaves to death. He’s worse than a slave, the opening scene says, as he’s being dragged behind a horse in the sweltering heat, while the three other slaves on the journey are sitting in a cage with wheels. The director of this movie, Quentin Tarantino, makes a cameo appearance in this scene as an Australian slaver. Django attempts to convince the men that he’s a bounty hunter and that they should pursue his target in order to collect the riches. Even in this scene, the white men are given more screen time discussing this than he is, convincing them. While the audience knows that Django is the main characters, the slavers clearly don’t see this. It’s almost as if they don’t think the black man’s capable of having any anterior motives when they finally agree with his plan and just hand him a gun. He proceeds to shoot them down. Not only did Django not need Dr. King Schultz, but his skills surpass his teachers, as that con was the quickest one in the entire
There’s a buildup of suspense and then a release. The buildup, of course is a very easy thing to establish in a movie about that specific time period, in that specific region. Slavery and racism are two entwined …show more content…
As with the first half of the movie, they were one step ahead of their foes, with the German’s skills in conning people, and the protagonist with his knowledge of the South. They were one step away from their goal when Old Man Carrucan smells foul play and tells Monsieur Candie. This is where Samuel L. Jackson comes in. The scene that plays out afterward is chilling. Candie walks into the dining room with a skull and a knife in tow. The cinematography in this scene is interesting. The camera is often on Candie and his lawyer, with the back of Dr. King Schultz’s head on the right side of the screen. Every once in a while, the camera cuts back to show Django’s expression, the realization that the scam had failed. This implies that, though he now knows that they were only there to save Django’s wife, Candie is addressing the German doctor more than he is the protagonist. That he still considers Django subhuman and less guilty than the white man who must’ve put all of those destructive ideas in his head. The rest of that scene is unsettling, as Broomhilda is forcefully dragged into the room. When Candie negotiated and sells her for a ridiculous price, he slams the hammer; previously used to dislodge the skull, right next to her head and yells, …show more content…
Would Django even be there if Dr. Schultz hadn’t taken him in and convinced him that he could free his wife? Was he anything without the experienced bounty hunter? This is addressed after the German dies abruptly and Django is sent away to work at a mine with a reputation for working its slaves to death. He’s worse than a slave, the opening scene says, as he’s being dragged behind a horse in the sweltering heat, while the three other slaves on the journey are sitting in a cage with wheels. The director of this movie, Quentin Tarantino, makes a cameo appearance in this scene as an Australian slaver. Django attempts to convince the men that he’s a bounty hunter and that they should pursue his target in order to collect the riches. Even in this scene, the white men are given more screen time discussing this than he is, convincing them. While the audience knows that Django is the main characters, the slavers clearly don’t see this. It’s almost as if they don’t think the black man’s capable of having any anterior motives when they finally agree with his plan and just hand him a gun. He proceeds to shoot them down. Not only did Django not need Dr. King Schultz, but his skills surpass his teachers, as that con was the quickest one in the entire