Django Unchained

→ in
Tools    





Was that him at the beginning too? I thought so lol. That damn ghost Harry popping up all over the place.
Yup it was, good old Harry Morgan just refuses to truly die
__________________



Was that him at the beginning too? I thought so lol. That damn ghost Harry popping up all over the place.
I read somewhere that it was a nod to low budget spaghetti westerns, where they would have one person playing two roles.



I have a friend who has great taste in films, and he said this was the best Tarentino film in years. He absolutely loved it, so I'll probably see it.



SammyNoNo - Why did you give me negative rep?

You just joined today. The post I was responding to has since been edited by the admin to delete the offensive language I was talking about, so unless you'd been lurking when it happened you've no real idea what DastardlyBastard actually said.



I didn't know that people take the thumbs up/thumbs down system seriously here. I simply disagree that cursing should be outlawed in a forum. I don't have anything personally against you.



Fair point but it's a staple rule of Movie Forums that things are kept to a PG13 rating

Otherwise, where do you draw the line at the more adult behaviour?
Next thing will be nekkid pics of unsavoury women and excessive language to the point that it just becomes a bad place to spend an evening reading and chatting when it can be a pleasant place instead.

Also, there are some younger MoFos on the forum... which I don't think many people would agree that bad language is something they should be subjected to. It's bad enough in the world outside.



I'm completely against a forum becoming smutty, disgusting, and vulgar, but curse words are a normal thing in an adult's life. I usually abstain from using curse words, however, anyone who is mature enough to be on this forum is mature enough to be exposed to curse words. Just as long as it is used in moderation.



Otherwise, where do you draw the line at the more adult behaviour?
Next thing will be nekkid pics of unsavoury women and excessive language to the point that it just becomes a bad place to spend an evening reading and chatting when it can be a pleasant place instead.
"Dogs and cats, living together! MASS HYSTERIA!"

Anyway, yeah, don't blame Miss Vicky, blame me for the rule. I feel pretty strongly that curbing language raises the level of civility (rare, on the Internet, I think we'd all agree) and gives us a more diverse group of opinions, because there are all sorts of people who have plenty of insight that would be driven away otherwise because some teenager called them an idiot. We don't shy away from conflict, we just try to make sure it's substantive conflict, and I find this really helps.

It is certainly true that anyone mature enough to be on the forum is mature enough to hear some cursing. But it's also true that anyone thoughtful enough to be of value to the community is thoughtful enough to find another way to express themselves. And we're usually pretty reasonable about enforcement; it's not a zero-tolerance thing.

So, I've given the matter quite a bit of thought and think it's a net positive. I think it's helped to attract more thoughtful people over time. If anyone disagrees and is bugged by the restriction, I can understand that. It's a valid position. But I hope and expect that they (you, other new members, whoever) will give it a shot, and obviously abide by it as long as they're here.

Hope that explains things.



I like your view on this matter Yoda. I think reasonable and fair enforcement is a good view to have as a moderator.



I like your view on this matter Yoda. I think reasonable and fair enforcement is a good view to have as a moderator.
Whilst I agree that cursing shouldn't be banned, if I can recall correctly then the post that Miss Vicky was replying to was extremely offensive and contained a homophobic remark as well, it's just that it has been edited out so you wouldn't know.



Whilst I agree that cursing shouldn't be banned, if I can recall correctly then the post that Miss Vicky was replying to was extremely offensive and contained a homophobic remark as well, it's just that it has been edited out so you wouldn't know.
You do recall correctly.

There was also an offensive comment in the post that referred to another group of people. It wasn't a matter of cussing.



Saw it last night, great movie. Perhaps the best acting all-around for any movie this year, except maybe The Master. Christopher Waltz, Jamie Foxx, Samuel L. Jackson, and especially Leonardo DiCaprio all perform magnificently and arguably deserve Oscar noms. Tarantino balances light-heartedness and humor well with the heavy significance of slavery, which is what the film is about. He shoves a shameful part of American history into the audience's face and makes you think while simultaneously making you laugh and smile throughout.

The film was somewhat poorly edited, though. Some scenes and transitions seemed out of place and sloppy, while some of the soundtrack choices and transitions were also questionable. For example, we hear a 20 second Tupac track that abruptly ends and cuts to silence. Awkward. Also, the film was overly long and easily could have been chopped down by 20 minutes and still get the point across. Also, Tarantino unnecessarily acts in the film and does a bad job as the only bad actor in the whole movie. In fact, that entire scene with Tarantino was unnecessary and should have been removed.


You can't erase the way Tarantino does his films. Every movie has him playing a character no matter if its bad acting or not. That scene shouldn't of been removed because it made sense and filled up the ending.
__________________
no one else is dealing with your demons friend - tyler joseph.



You do recall correctly.

There was also an offensive comment in the post that referred to another group of people. It wasn't a matter of cussing.
What did Dastardly say?
__________________
Yeah, there's no body mutilation in it



Yo, let's keep this thread on track. If you want details PM me or something.
I find this unneeded because this small issue shouldn't get everyone into it. Just leave it and let two adults deal with their own problems.

Back to the real thread

WARNING: "Django Unchained" spoilers below
Yoda do you think the movie would of done better if they didn't kill of Christoph ??



Whoa buddy, wrap that sort of thing in spoiler tags. Anyway, here's my answer:

WARNING: "Django Unchained" spoilers below
It depends on what you mean by "better." It probably wouldn't affect box office because you don't know until you've seen it, so they already have your money. The only way it could hurt the film's gross would be by hurting word of mouth, and that's pretty indirect. And I don't think the kinds of people who see Tarantino's movies would be upset with that kind of development.

If you just mean general opinion, I'd still say no, for the second reason above. People largely know what they're getting, and I thought the choice made plenty of sense.



Django has everything you can expect from a Tarantino movie. Witty dialogue, brilliant soundtrack, mix of gruesome violence with humor... the list goes on.

I saw it earlier this week and had a great time, one of the most entertaining experiences I've had in a while. And it goes without saying that it's Tarantino's most energetic film to date. 2 hours and 45 minutes felt like 1 hour and 45 minutes to me, that's how good it was.