RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews



Message

Rgirvan44 -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (23/1/2013 9:43:23 PM)

Django Unchained is a great, great film. Where does it sit on Tarantino’s filmography? Hard to say at the moment, but I think it is safe to say it is better than Death Proof at the very least.

Django is a massive two fingers towards the romantic visions of the South, both before and after the Civil War. You see it crop up all the time in cinema. From Birth of a Nation to Gone with the Wind (both mocked quite a bit here) and onwards to idea of the poor confederate soldier who was only fighting for States rights. Firefly is really just a reinforcement of that romantic ideal.

Here is a film that shows us that world was bullshit. It was nasty and horrible and ruled over by idiots. It was a system that crueller due to the casual dismissal of life, rather than through a drive to torture or punish.
As for the last 20mins. You need them. Django needs to take charge of his own life. He needs to get out those chains himself and make his own choice to rescues his wife. Otherwise everything he does in the film is as a result of Dr King. Django is only Unchained at the very end.

Foxx does some really interesting work. Watch as he seems to drink beer for the first time. Watch as he grows more confident in the world – tell off them white man for wearing a hat inside for example. While all the other characters (King included) as locked and have no real arcs, Django grows. Watch the first ten minutes and the final ten minutes. There is a vast difference. Just because Foxx doesn’t get to go BIG all the time, doesn’t mean he is delivering a weak performance.

As for Jackson – are people really saying he was doing the same old thing? He genuinely stunned me with his performance. The way he plays with the public’s perception of him. You get pulled in with the humour, but by the end the audience is ready for this guy to be riddled with bullets. This is one of his best performances and it makes you wonder if he only really tries for directors he truly respects.

Waltz and Leo are the big performers in the film and they deliver the goods. What is interesting is the power play between the two of them. Candie is a guy who deep down knows he isn’t that smart, and resents being reminded of the fact. It is why Stephen doesn’t reveal what he knows at the table – it would make Candie look weak. It isn’t that Waltz is smarter than everybody in the room – it is just that he is smarter than white people in the slave south.

It was inevitable that both of them would die. Django needed his own space to grow into the hero we see at the end.

Maybe Tarantino should have called it Django Begins or something…



Qwerty Norris -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (23/1/2013 10:35:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82


quote:

ORIGINAL: Qwerty Norris

Had he ended things within 5 to 10 minutes of the handshake and worked out a suitable ending to bring that sequence (and the film itself) to a satisfying climax, it would have resulted in his best work since Jackie Brown - easily.




I don't know, the pause between the handshake shootout and the final act of revenge was necessary to show Django's route to freedom coming full circle. I think him getting himself out of the Australian situation, and going back on his own was very important to the characterisation of the guy.



SPOILERS - DON'T READ IF YOU'VE NOT SEEN THE FILM

I know what you're saying, but that for me still doesn't justify the problems with the final quarter - whether it's QTs appearance, the jarring of the narrative, some ill-advised scenes tonally etc.

Furthermore; I felt the fundamental character trait of Django was be reunited with his wife - that for me is the greatest signifier of achieving his freedom. Admittedly there is certainly a body language which hints he is very eager for all the perpetrators to be six feet under, but I do feel this still could have been suggested even without the last 30-40 minutes that we're given.

With the events shortly after the handshake, there was an opportunity to play things out in a way which could have encompassed these concepts of retribution and freedom - without one overwhelming the other. Yet it goes for an option where the film's clearest message is that vengeance is both justified & necessary - where the shades of grey all of a sudden become simplistic black & white strokes. It's the same one QT's been frequently captivated by in the Kill Bills, Death Proof & Inglorious bar stewards and in my opinion it's to the detriment of his craft.

That said, a film with revenge at its heart isn't necessarily a problem (even if I do find it somewhat repetitive & banal), but it's the visible pleasure Django and his wife get out of achieving retribution which I really take exception to (seriously, Washington goes from barely cracking a smile in the majority to whooping a burning building in the final moments) . For me, it demeans their characters and consequently the entire film - something which I think can be attributed to Tarrantino's last three works.



AxlReznor -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (23/1/2013 10:45:14 PM)

If I'd been treated like that by someone, I think I'd be celebrating when their house explodes, too.



Qwerty Norris -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (23/1/2013 10:52:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

If I'd been treated like that by someone, I think I'd be celebrating when their house explodes, too.


I have my doubts.

Relief and celebration are two very different things.



Deviation -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (24/1/2013 1:15:16 AM)

I loved every second of it (other then Tarantino's acting, whatever the point of Zoe Bell was and the waste of a talented actress like Washington to just eye-candy), it's one of the very few times I felt that every shot and scene in a Tarantino needed to be there in full lentgh and I loved it.

SPOILERS

I'm not sure that the house being blown just represented revenge, it was a destruction of Jackson's Uncle Tom and an end to some horrible people and the slaving culture around them. It wasn't just revenge, it was an end to all that.



Phubbs -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (24/1/2013 5:05:30 AM)

If you wanna watch a good film about slavery then go see 'Lincoln' geez! this is just Tarantino's home made dream fanboy nonsense.



Drew_231 -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (24/1/2013 6:51:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44
As for Jackson – are people really saying he was doing the same old thing? He genuinely stunned me with his performance. The way he plays with the public’s perception of him. You get pulled in with the humour, but by the end the audience is ready for this guy to be riddled with bullets. This is one of his best performances and it makes you wonder if he only really tries for directors he truly respects.



I can't agree with this more. I saw it last night and one of the things that struck me the most (and made me feel slightly uncomfortable) was the watching an actor like Jackson (who we always associate with with strong, powerful characters) being talked down too and almost demoralized by DiCaprios spoilt rich kid.
It's also a performance full of menace and hatred. The scene where he confronts Bromhilda about her relationship with Django had me more on edge than any other. Jackson hasnt impressed me for a long time, but I came away from this a newfound respect for him.

Don Johnson also deserves a special mention. It's not a big role but his two scenes are arguably the funniest Tarantino has ever written.



Qwerty Norris -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (24/1/2013 10:03:10 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation


I'm not sure that the house being blown just represented revenge, it was a destruction of Jackson's Uncle Tom and an end to some horrible people and the slaving culture around them. It wasn't just revenge, it was an end to all that.


I didn't say "just", more that it had taken centre stage above everything else when it had spent a great deal of time & effort not getting carried away by that notion. For someone who has become immensely tired of QT delivering films where the eventual pay-off is a vengeful shoot-out/sword fight/ car chase etc carried out with glee by the so called protagonists, it was extremely disappointing to see proceedings being cheapened this way...again.

And he had the chance to put "an end to all that" 30-35 minutes previously, but he didn't take it.

I accept that Django needed to be on his own in order to fully live up to the "unchained" title, but again, that for me still doesn't justify the awkwardness of the final stretch of the film.





matty_b -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (24/1/2013 10:42:15 AM)

quote:

Foxx does some really interesting work. Watch as he seems to drink beer for the first time. Watch as he grows more confident in the world – tell off them white man for wearing a hat inside for example. While all the other characters (King included) as locked and have no real arcs, Django grows. Watch the first ten minutes and the final ten minutes. There is a vast difference. Just because Foxx doesn’t get to go BIG all the time, doesn’t mean he is delivering a weak performance.


Yeah, I'd agree with that. That was the main thing I disagreed with in Empire's review. If he started off blustery and shouty (playing it like Jackson might have played it, for example), then it wouldn't have worked.



Don_a_van -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (24/1/2013 10:58:49 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Drew_231


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44
As for Jackson – are people really saying he was doing the same old thing? He genuinely stunned me with his performance. The way he plays with the public’s perception of him. You get pulled in with the humour, but by the end the audience is ready for this guy to be riddled with bullets. This is one of his best performances and it makes you wonder if he only really tries for directors he truly respects.



I can't agree with this more. I saw it last night and one of the things that struck me the most (and made me feel slightly uncomfortable) was the watching an actor like Jackson (who we always associate with with strong, powerful characters) being talked down too and almost demoralized by DiCaprios spoilt rich kid.
It's also a performance full of menace and hatred. The scene where he confronts Bromhilda about her relationship with Django had me more on edge than any other. Jackson hasnt impressed me for a long time, but I came away from this a newfound respect for him.



I think we may have been watching a different film

Smart ar*e comments - check
Lots of swearing - check
Same tone of voice\accent - check
starting to talk slooowly and THEN SHOUTING ALL OF A SUDDEN - check

He looks, talks and sounds exactly the same whether he is playing a house slave, a jedi master (ok no swearing in this one but I could tell he had to hold himself back), a biologist or a black Scottish man wearing a kilt. I'm not saying he is a bad actor and occasionally he is capable of surprising me (Unbreakable springs to mind although he still does his SHOUTY stich in that too) but I just wish he'd stretch himself a bit more in how he plays his characters.



Rgirvan44 -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (24/1/2013 11:10:42 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Don_a_van


quote:

ORIGINAL: Drew_231


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44
As for Jackson – are people really saying he was doing the same old thing? He genuinely stunned me with his performance. The way he plays with the public’s perception of him. You get pulled in with the humour, but by the end the audience is ready for this guy to be riddled with bullets. This is one of his best performances and it makes you wonder if he only really tries for directors he truly respects.



I can't agree with this more. I saw it last night and one of the things that struck me the most (and made me feel slightly uncomfortable) was the watching an actor like Jackson (who we always associate with with strong, powerful characters) being talked down too and almost demoralized by DiCaprios spoilt rich kid.
It's also a performance full of menace and hatred. The scene where he confronts Bromhilda about her relationship with Django had me more on edge than any other. Jackson hasnt impressed me for a long time, but I came away from this a newfound respect for him.



I think we may have been watching a different film

Smart ar*e comments - check
Lots of swearing - check
Same tone of voice\accent - check
starting to talk slooowly and THEN SHOUTING ALL OF A SUDDEN - check

He looks, talks and sounds exactly the same whether he is playing a house slave, a jedi master (ok no swearing in this one but I could tell he had to hold himself back), a biologist or a black Scottish man wearing a kilt. I'm not saying he is a bad actor and occasionally he is capable of surprising me (Unbreakable springs to mind although he still does his SHOUTY stich in that too) but I just wish he'd stretch himself a bit more in how he plays his characters.


I think you need to watch him as Mace Windu, Jules and Stephen again. They are vastly different performances.



Dannybohy -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (24/1/2013 11:48:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44


quote:

ORIGINAL: Don_a_van


quote:

ORIGINAL: Drew_231


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44
As for Jackson – are people really saying he was doing the same old thing? He genuinely stunned me with his performance. The way he plays with the public’s perception of him. You get pulled in with the humour, but by the end the audience is ready for this guy to be riddled with bullets. This is one of his best performances and it makes you wonder if he only really tries for directors he truly respects.



I can't agree with this more. I saw it last night and one of the things that struck me the most (and made me feel slightly uncomfortable) was the watching an actor like Jackson (who we always associate with with strong, powerful characters) being talked down too and almost demoralized by DiCaprios spoilt rich kid.
It's also a performance full of menace and hatred. The scene where he confronts Bromhilda about her relationship with Django had me more on edge than any other. Jackson hasnt impressed me for a long time, but I came away from this a newfound respect for him.



I think we may have been watching a different film

Smart ar*e comments - check
Lots of swearing - check
Same tone of voice\accent - check
starting to talk slooowly and THEN SHOUTING ALL OF A SUDDEN - check

He looks, talks and sounds exactly the same whether he is playing a house slave, a jedi master (ok no swearing in this one but I could tell he had to hold himself back), a biologist or a black Scottish man wearing a kilt. I'm not saying he is a bad actor and occasionally he is capable of surprising me (Unbreakable springs to mind although he still does his SHOUTY stich in that too) but I just wish he'd stretch himself a bit more in how he plays his characters.


I think you need to watch him as Mace Windu, Jules and Stephen again. They are vastly different performances.

erm... no...they really are not [:)]



Rgirvan44 -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (24/1/2013 12:02:45 PM)

Care to expand on this, or happy to leave it at a one-liner?



jcthefirst -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (24/1/2013 12:59:37 PM)

He may have the same tone of voice (kind of hard not to) but the performance is a million miles away, as RGirv says, from Jules. Or Ordell. Or Windu.

It's probably closest to his A Time To Kill character (although from a completely different point of view), but at the same time so far removed from it as well.



adambatman82 -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (24/1/2013 1:00:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Care to expand on this, or happy to leave it at a one-liner?


Ignore him RG, the poor guy only saw the film on his laptop with intermittent occurrences of "For Your Consideration" popping up at the bottom of the screen! [:D]



adambatman82 -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (24/1/2013 1:02:39 PM)

EDIT - Decided against biting.



Dannybohy -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (24/1/2013 1:16:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Care to expand on this, or happy to leave it at a one-liner?

quote:

Mace Windu, Jules and Stephen


Mace Windu, Jules and Stephen .. all the same performance. Not sure why you needed it to be expanded.



Dannybohy -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (24/1/2013 1:22:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82

EDIT - Decided against biting.

or rather you decided against more generalisations, assumptions and general dullness.



MonsterCat -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (24/1/2013 1:31:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dannybohy


quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82

EDIT - Decided against biting.

or rather you decided against more generalisations, assumptions and general dullness.


lol irony.



clownfoot -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (24/1/2013 1:40:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Django is a massive two fingers towards the romantic visions of the South, both before and after the Civil War. You see it crop up all the time in cinema. From Birth of a Nation to Gone with the Wind (both mocked quite a bit here) and onwards to idea of the poor confederate soldier who was only fighting for States rights. Firefly is really just a reinforcement of that romantic ideal.



These words have convinced me I really need to go and watch this now. Although, with my ability to get to the cinema these days I may have to settle for watching Glory again instead.

Also, I'm watching this thread peeps. So let's not start being dickish, huh?



Olaf -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (24/1/2013 2:07:24 PM)

is Sam Jackson's character an Uncle Tom? He displays more personal autonomy than that term suggests (the scene where he talks to Candie in the library has already been mentioned - clearly Stephen and Candie's relationship is more developed than master/servant). It's also interesting that he's left til last rather than Candie, which makes the whole revenge question more interesting. Not fully developed any thoughts on this, but just throwing it out there.



adambatman82 -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (24/1/2013 5:18:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Olaf

is Sam Jackson's character an Uncle Tom? He displays more personal autonomy than that term suggests (the scene where he talks to Candie in the library has already been mentioned - clearly Stephen and Candie's relationship is more developed than master/servant). It's also interesting that he's left til last rather than Candie, which makes the whole revenge question more interesting. Not fully developed any thoughts on this, but just throwing it out there.


I thought the general consideration was that he was a subversion of the 'Uncle Tom'? As in, what you are saying is how most have read it.



Don_a_van -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (24/1/2013 5:22:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Olaf

is Sam Jackson's character an Uncle Tom? He displays more personal autonomy than that term suggests (the scene where he talks to Candie in the library has already been mentioned - clearly Stephen and Candie's relationship is more developed than master/servant). It's also interesting that he's left til last rather than Candie, which makes the whole revenge question more interesting. Not fully developed any thoughts on this, but just throwing it out there.


Slight Spoilers ***

To be honest that's one of the things I found quite disappointing about the last 3rd of the film. Switching from Candie who had been built up really well as the "Great White Menace" to all of a sudden having some foul mouthed old black dude as the main protagonist felt very jarring to me and just didn't work as well as the previous dynamic between Foxx\Waltz\Dicaprio IMO not to mention the fact that it completely abandons the black slave rises against his white oppressors story arc that was going on up till that point. I'd say everything after the handshake and appearance of SLJ just didn't work for me.



AxlReznor -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (24/1/2013 5:27:40 PM)

That sudden change was foreshadowed though, don't you think? With the line "Black slavers are lower than the head house nigger, and that's pretty fuckin' low".



Olaf -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (24/1/2013 5:30:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82


quote:

ORIGINAL: Olaf

is Sam Jackson's character an Uncle Tom? He displays more personal autonomy than that term suggests (the scene where he talks to Candie in the library has already been mentioned - clearly Stephen and Candie's relationship is more developed than master/servant). It's also interesting that he's left til last rather than Candie, which makes the whole revenge question more interesting. Not fully developed any thoughts on this, but just throwing it out there.


I thought the general consideration was that he was a subversion of the 'Uncle Tom'? As in, what you are saying is how most have read it.


I meant to quote Dev's post. Feels good to be the critical consensus though.



Rgirvan44 -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (24/1/2013 7:07:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Don_a_van


quote:

ORIGINAL: Olaf

is Sam Jackson's character an Uncle Tom? He displays more personal autonomy than that term suggests (the scene where he talks to Candie in the library has already been mentioned - clearly Stephen and Candie's relationship is more developed than master/servant). It's also interesting that he's left til last rather than Candie, which makes the whole revenge question more interesting. Not fully developed any thoughts on this, but just throwing it out there.


Slight Spoilers ***

To be honest that's one of the things I found quite disappointing about the last 3rd of the film. Switching from Candie who had been built up really well as the "Great White Menace" to all of a sudden having some foul mouthed old black dude as the main protagonist felt very jarring to me and just didn't work as well as the previous dynamic between Foxx\Waltz\Dicaprio IMO not to mention the fact that it completely abandons the black slave rises against his white oppressors story arc that was going on up till that point. I'd say everything after the handshake and appearance of SLJ just didn't work for me.


Is the story about Django rising up agains his white oppressors? He does that in the first third of the film. I don't really think it is as much of an arc as you think it is. Django has one mission - to get his wife, and along the way he happens to become a badass.

Put yourself in Django's shoes. Candie isn't anything he ain't seen before. He doesn't like the guy, but that is the world they live in - thus his "Americans" comment. Candie is King's main enemy, not Django's - which is why the D man takes a backseat for much of that sequence.

Now we know that Django thinks people like Stephen are the lowest of the low. That is someone he would have deep rooted hated of - and that is why he is singled out.

Was Candie built up as the Great White Menace? He was a bit stupid, and resented being surronded by people who were smarter and not of his race.

He hides his stupidty through Southern manners, but he didn't really demostrate any cunning of his own. Which is why Waltz does get pissed that he lost. What King of course doesn't know, is that Candie didn't figure it out at all.

Candie should have been another Big Daddy, had it not been for the intervention of Stephen.

And to go into more detail on Jackson -

It boggles my mind that people think Jackson is doing the same old thing here. I wonder if I have even watched Pulp Fiction, Star Wars and Django when I read here folks think it is the exact.same.performance. The only thing they have in common is that they are played by the same guy - but his mannerisms, his voice inflections and what he is protraying are so different that to paraphrase a certain film, they ain't even the same sport.

This - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PE9Qm8mShik

And this - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXjT6Dg4E68

And heck watch him in Jungle Fever.

Then watch Django.

Are you all honestly saying he is doing the same thing in all four movies?



Deviation -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (24/1/2013 7:15:40 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82


quote:

ORIGINAL: Olaf

is Sam Jackson's character an Uncle Tom? He displays more personal autonomy than that term suggests (the scene where he talks to Candie in the library has already been mentioned - clearly Stephen and Candie's relationship is more developed than master/servant). It's also interesting that he's left til last rather than Candie, which makes the whole revenge question more interesting. Not fully developed any thoughts on this, but just throwing it out there.


I thought the general consideration was that he was a subversion of the 'Uncle Tom'? As in, what you are saying is how most have read it.


He still displays an element of servitude (he was the brains of the house and the smartest one there, yet he chose that position of servant out of his own will) and he DEFINITELY partook in the brutal oppression of his own people while acting like a walking stereotype. There is the subversion of personal autonomy as you mentioned, but his other aspects are those of what Uncle Tom was perceived later to be, and probably worse, that he wanted it that way and did it out of his own will makes him just evil.

EDIT: I imagine he really loved Candie and his sister right?



C K Dexter Haven -> One star missing from Empire's review (25/1/2013 9:07:46 AM)

There was either a typo or someone at the Empire office must be friends with that Channel Four newsreader to only giver Django Unchained a 'paltry' four stars.
If the overblown, talk-fest of Daniel Day Lewis doing an impersonation of Mr Burns from The Simpsons merits five stars (oh, it's Sir Steven and don't Empire just love him?) then Django Unchained is by far the more entertaining, informative and in terms of historical accuracy compared to Lincoln's jaundiced storytelling better of the two films by a country mile.
This may well yet be Tarantino's best movie to date -and that quote coming from someone who rates Pulp Fiction as QT's otherwise best movie to date.
If Christoph Waltz doesn't dance off that stage with another BAFTA & an Oscar in February then there is something seriously wrong with the voters.
I still haven't forgiven them for giving an award to 'darling Meryl' for her portrayal of the wiocked witch of the west ahead of Rooney Mara for playing Lisbeth in The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, but I digress.

Django Unchained is entertaining, funny, violent, action packed and yes, thought prtovoking.
The first hour of the film is up there with the best westerns EVER, with Waltz's Dr Schultz and Jamie Foxx underplaying nicely as Django form a buddy relationship worthy of mention alongside Butch and Sundance, Wyatt and Doc, Ethan and his nephew in The Searchers and a few other great western teamings (Scott Glenn & Kevin Kline in Silverado might just stay out of that list but bubble under).
The scenes involving Don Johnson are a hoot -as is well documented, and the final act involving Leo and Samuel L Jackson bring about a satisfying and bloody conclusion.

Make no mistake though; this is Waltz's movie -and Quentin's of course -and like early Scorscese with De Niro, we have a movie pairing of director and actor worthy of eulogising for many years if we're lucky.

GO SEE THIS FILM -and learn that the only way the slaves were freed was because



Don_a_van -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (25/1/2013 11:36:17 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44
It boggles my mind that people think Jackson is doing the same old thing here. I wonder if I have even watched Pulp Fiction, Star Wars and Django when I read here folks think it is the exact.same.performance. The only thing they have in common is that they are played by the same guy - but his mannerisms, his voice inflections and what he is protraying are so different that to paraphrase a certain film, they ain't even the same sport.

This - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PE9Qm8mShik

And this - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXjT6Dg4E68

And heck watch him in Jungle Fever.

Then watch Django.

Are you all honestly saying he is doing the same thing in all four movies?


Sorry but with the odd exception, maybe one in every half a dozen films, he just feels like the same character to me with different makeup on. Not saying he is a bad actor, in fact Samuel L Jackson is great....at playing Samuel L Jackson. So on this point I think we are just going to have to agree to disagree [:)]



Dannybohy -> RE: Oh you silver tongued devil you (25/1/2013 12:04:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Don_a_van

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44
It boggles my mind that people think Jackson is doing the same old thing here. I wonder if I have even watched Pulp Fiction, Star Wars and Django when I read here folks think it is the exact.same.performance. The only thing they have in common is that they are played by the same guy - but his mannerisms, his voice inflections and what he is protraying are so different that to paraphrase a certain film, they ain't even the same sport.

This - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PE9Qm8mShik

And this - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXjT6Dg4E68

And heck watch him in Jungle Fever.

Then watch Django.

Are you all honestly saying he is doing the same thing in all four movies?


Sorry but with the odd exception, maybe one in every half a dozen films, he just feels like the same character to me with different makeup on. Not saying he is a bad actor, in fact Samuel L Jackson is great....at playing Samuel L Jackson. So on this point I think we are just going to have to agree to disagree [:)]


He peaked at Pulp Fiction, lets face it! and have a tasty Burger!



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.03125