Weinstein Company, The | Release Date: December 25, 2012
8.6
USER SCORE
Universal acclaim based on 2056 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
1,865
Mixed:
114
Negative:
77
Watch Now
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
9
TheDRauchJan 2, 2013
I hate to state the (very) obvious, but 'Django Unchained' is just what you would expect from a film by Quentin Tarantino. Granted, 'Django' isn't his greatest film where emotional depth and resonance is concerned, but it certainly is theI hate to state the (very) obvious, but 'Django Unchained' is just what you would expect from a film by Quentin Tarantino. Granted, 'Django' isn't his greatest film where emotional depth and resonance is concerned, but it certainly is the most entertaining. I had a blast. It is probably the single film this year that I had particularly high hopes for that were met to the exact level of my expectations. It follows the same type of mold of any Tarantino film. There are many drawn out scenes of interesting dialogue that typically conclude with sudden bursts of super-violence which are meant to be jarring (and are). There are multiple cameos from established actors (trust me, there are a lot of them) and there is usually one standout off-the-wall character that parades around like a controlled, unsettling lunatic. Those shoes, last filled by Christoph Waltz in 'Inglourious Basterds', are now worn by Leonardo DiCaprio as the racist and refined francophile brat, Calvin Candie. He is truly a great villain here, delivering one of the best character interpretations of his career. All of the other performances are great too, though. Waltz proves his worth as a full-on Tarantino convert as the morally good Dr. Schultz, demonstrating the control he had in 'Inglourious Basterds', but with the traces of humanity that didn't exist in Hans Landa. Samuel L. Jackson, a standard in Tarantino movies, gives a thoroughly maddening performance as the book-keeping slave (the name escapes me now), whose motives and actions are consistently intriguing. And who could forget Foxx, displaying a cool, hardened, revenge-driven character so filled with spite for the evil around him that it nearly jeopardizes his plans to save his wife at every turn. I am also happy that, when writing the script, the word n****r wasn't taken out, not shying away for the times of today out of reverence for historical accuracy. There are plenty scenes worth noting for their brutal violence and often gut-busting hilarity, but I shouldn't spoil the film. You should go see it. It's really awesome. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
9
jeanpearlDec 27, 2012
As accomplished as he is, Tarantino is the most underrated director/writer in Hollywood... NO ONE has a better feel for dialogue, characters and mis-en-scene (the way a scene is played out). If Tarantino ever did a "serious" film likeAs accomplished as he is, Tarantino is the most underrated director/writer in Hollywood... NO ONE has a better feel for dialogue, characters and mis-en-scene (the way a scene is played out). If Tarantino ever did a "serious" film like Schindler's list he would win every single Oscar in every category... But he's got his own style where he doesn't take himself too seriously which makes his own highly entertaining... I hope he never stoops that low and does a "traditional" Hollywood drama worthy only of "true" dramatic directors.... because he can direct "drama" better than anyone and he doesn't need to prove anything to anyone... He's simply that good, sitting head and shoulder above the rest of Hollywood "elite"... Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
10
playoffbeardJan 1, 2013
I had to create an account to help prop this movie up to where it belongs- We all know that QT movies all share certain characteristics, which is why I'm surprised to see complaints about length, violence and language. A QT movie is like aI had to create an account to help prop this movie up to where it belongs- We all know that QT movies all share certain characteristics, which is why I'm surprised to see complaints about length, violence and language. A QT movie is like a top-shelf whiskey; it's high quality, purely distilled and complex - but it's also harsh! It's for adults with mature pallets. In that context, I feel that QT's filmography has been once again strengthened by this epic film. Yes, it is long - but I didn't want it to end! Yes it's violent, but violence (and the nature and style of the violence) is a QT trademark I expect, and yes it's vulgar, but the film's language reflects the it's setting. What's more, it's brilliantly clever, artful and there are individual performances that are iconic (particularly Waltz and DiCaprio). One other note: This film isn't Blacks vs. Whites - both races are represented by characters on both sides of good and evil. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
7
skim123Jan 1, 2013
Good movie. Not amazing, but good. A little too much slow motion that didn't really add anything to the movie. Jamie Foxx was good, but I was hoping for a more charismatic performance from him.
2 of 7 users found this helpful25
All this user's reviews
1
galram2631Dec 27, 2012
This movie is one of the most boring, predictable, insidious and "inglorious" western of the last 10 years, and of course, to my criteria, the worst of Tarantino. I don't know what him was thinking (maybe mind-off), when directed this film.
6 of 22 users found this helpful616
All this user's reviews
4
crazyspacemanJan 4, 2013
While I was extremely excited to see Tarantino's take on a Spaghetti Western Slave Revenge story, the results were mixed. It wasn't what any of us expected.

The first sequences was humorous, but failed to capture Tarantino's aim at
While I was extremely excited to see Tarantino's take on a Spaghetti Western Slave Revenge story, the results were mixed. It wasn't what any of us expected.

The first sequences was humorous, but failed to capture Tarantino's aim at creating tension - a theme that would plague the film for much of its nearly three hour gargantuan running time. When the dialogue crackled, his intentional quick zooms dampened the mood. When the action was sharp, his intention to add humor ruined the shock value.

Where characters and dialogue are usually his strong point, Tarantino instead seemed to be going for laughs by using the N word in every possible way. Amusing for awhile, but it wore off at the 2/3 mark.

The film couldn't have been cast better - From Waltz and Foxx through every antagonist and bit part - special marks for Don Johnson who was both a charming southern gentlemen and an angry racist in every other sentence. Di Caprio nailed his role, which in a movie of overacting, seemed to be nuanced in the best ways possible.

A day later, I still don't know if Samuel L Jackson stole the show or ruined it. His performance was uneven, but carried the 3rd act.

If Tarantino continues to make his brand of genre pics, I will watch them, as he clearly enjoys making movies as much as we like watching them. But he's a victim of Inglorious' critical success, as a good 25-30 minutes could have been cut out of this film and made it even stronger.
Expand
3 of 11 users found this helpful38
All this user's reviews
3
OstrichDec 28, 2012
I loved Kill Bill, Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, etc. they are truly classics, but Django just did not do it for me. From the very first scenes I had a hard time getting immersed in the movie. Christoph Waltz accent throughout the movieI loved Kill Bill, Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, etc. they are truly classics, but Django just did not do it for me. From the very first scenes I had a hard time getting immersed in the movie. Christoph Waltz accent throughout the movie seemed weird and out of place (in a western). There was much more "comedy" than in other Tarantino movies, but unfortunately it was pretty stupid and not funny. Tarantino usually has some phenomenal music scores up his sleeve, but in Django it felt really poorly done. The dialogue wasn't very good, and really the whole movie felt really implausible throughout (I know its a movie - but why is everyone so incredibly dumb?) I was looking forward to this movie, and I liked the concept, but it never drew me in. Expand
8 of 30 users found this helpful822
All this user's reviews
7
KarthXLRDec 28, 2012
Pulpy, funny, extremely violent and well-written. Unfortunately Django fails to deliver the tension obtained in older westerns or even his previous efforts. Still a great watch with some utterly fantastic performances.
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
6
heyitsmegrif4Jan 13, 2013
Django Unchained is nowhere near as good as it is advertised and it sadly really disappointing. It features some of the best performances of the year and it is really funny. Some of the scenes;however, lag, drag, and are too long andDjango Unchained is nowhere near as good as it is advertised and it sadly really disappointing. It features some of the best performances of the year and it is really funny. Some of the scenes;however, lag, drag, and are too long and conversational to make me interested. This is a good film, but it certainly is one of the more disappointing movies of the year for me. I give this film 65%. Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
3
SpankyApr 21, 2013
Definitely, Taranatino's worst movie to date. Hokey and absurd in many places. Ridiculous violence in others. Come on Quentin, is this supposed to be a comedy or a serious film? And when are you going to stop putting yourself in yourDefinitely, Taranatino's worst movie to date. Hokey and absurd in many places. Ridiculous violence in others. Come on Quentin, is this supposed to be a comedy or a serious film? And when are you going to stop putting yourself in your movies? I hate to break it to you, buddy, but you just can't act and you always bring the film down to a lower level when you're on-screen. I believe it's gotten to the point where you're believing your own press and feel anything you put out there is going to be accepted as brilliant by your legion of followers....and, unfortunately, based on some of the reviews I have been reading, this still seems to be true. How sad. P. S. I didn't include specifics because I didn't want to spoil the film for those still wanting to see it. Suffice to say, there are way too many holes in this script to be consider anything other than a B-movie by an A screenwriter and director. Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
9
metaxenoDec 27, 2012
I would actually give Django an 8.5 not a 9. I gave it an 8 on imdb so I would like to think the 2 scores average. I thought it was a good, solid movie. However a few aspects of the story seemed too ridiculous. Only a skilled filmmakers asI would actually give Django an 8.5 not a 9. I gave it an 8 on imdb so I would like to think the 2 scores average. I thought it was a good, solid movie. However a few aspects of the story seemed too ridiculous. Only a skilled filmmakers as these could get away with a movie like this. Example, a german cowboy? While it's an interesting idea I'm not sure how the character came to be. Perhaps more backstory about him would make it more believable and less ridiculous. Overall, like my rating says, the movie was quite good. It kept my emotions high whether I was laughing, near tears or simply blow away by the action. I must say that some of the slavery aspects were painful to swallow, much like a holocaust movie or a movie like Flight where an alcoholic nearly drinks himself to death. However, before the reader gets up in arms, the pain one is meant to feel regarding slavery and the like is appropriate. Unless you are ignorant and don't find it painful or you simply didn't think the slavery aspect was portrayed well in the film. I digress, Tarantino has once again rewritten history in a way. This film ranks third behind Pulp Fiction and Inglorious Bastards. While I'm not sure if what he is doing is right or in good taste even, he still pulls it off because he is a brilliant and talented filmmaker. I look forward to what he is going to do next, I just hope we won't have to wait to long... Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
8
BertoDec 26, 2012
While Django Unchained is definitely not a masterpiece, it is an extremely entertaining movie. Jamie Foxx's acting was not top-notch, but I did enjoy, as always, Samuel L. Jackson's performance. The storyline is pretty predictable but theWhile Django Unchained is definitely not a masterpiece, it is an extremely entertaining movie. Jamie Foxx's acting was not top-notch, but I did enjoy, as always, Samuel L. Jackson's performance. The storyline is pretty predictable but the movie does not suffer as a result. The historical setting is perfectly recreated. I found the hyper-exaggeration of violence quite funny at times, more so than in other of QT's movies. I would definitely see it again. 8/10 Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
9
nickgreene11Dec 28, 2012
Django is a classic in my mind. It falters in the arena of plot, the final climax feels far more contrived than natural, but apart from that, the film is spectacular. The characters/performances are incredibly entertaining. All of them are.Django is a classic in my mind. It falters in the arena of plot, the final climax feels far more contrived than natural, but apart from that, the film is spectacular. The characters/performances are incredibly entertaining. All of them are. Cinematography is gorgeous, and fitting. It's a good time to be had, just leave your thinking cap at home. Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
8
MispeledStalionDec 30, 2012
This is a legitimately fun film that doesn't skip being generally good. Great humor throughout, jaw-dropping violence, great characters and better performances. That all said, the best parts of this film, for me, was the fact that through allThis is a legitimately fun film that doesn't skip being generally good. Great humor throughout, jaw-dropping violence, great characters and better performances. That all said, the best parts of this film, for me, was the fact that through all the fun, Tarantino still creates a truly despicable villain, cringe-worthy and infuriating moments, and a fantastic atmosphere. Django is the most fun you're going to have in theaters this winter. Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
9
Compi24Jan 2, 2013
Thanks to a seemingly unending overflow of marvelous performances, a bitingly scintillating script, and the always-lovable auteurist techniques of Quentin Tarantino, "Django Unchained" makes for a truly gratifying film adventure and one ofThanks to a seemingly unending overflow of marvelous performances, a bitingly scintillating script, and the always-lovable auteurist techniques of Quentin Tarantino, "Django Unchained" makes for a truly gratifying film adventure and one of the greatest westerns I have ever seen. Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
10
nick5745Dec 26, 2012
Tarantino at his best. Another unique and incredible story. Great acting and screenplay. Definitely the best movie of the year hands down. Jamie Fox isn't the best actor in my opinion but I thought he was great for the role of Django, alsoTarantino at his best. Another unique and incredible story. Great acting and screenplay. Definitely the best movie of the year hands down. Jamie Fox isn't the best actor in my opinion but I thought he was great for the role of Django, also Samuel L. Jackson was classic as always! Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
4
alexandreasFeb 4, 2013
To me this is Tarantino's weakest effort yet. The film is funny at times, but does not manage to sustain interest throughout. It lasts for almost 3(!) hours, which is far too long with a plot as thin as this.
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
3
GRavidApr 1, 2013
The 1st thing that strikes me when the credits finally rolled was: "Oh my god, the trailer was so much better!" The 2nd thing was a very depressing thought: The film has no story structure. Christ, this is the man who wrote Reservoir Dogs,The 1st thing that strikes me when the credits finally rolled was: "Oh my god, the trailer was so much better!" The 2nd thing was a very depressing thought: The film has no story structure. Christ, this is the man who wrote Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, True Romance. What the hell went wrong? And finally, when DiCaprio gives you the best performance in the film you are in a world of trouble. Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
1
Oscar_SucksApr 11, 2013
Compared to "Inglorious Bastard"This movie is just like sh#t.Killing Burning Vulgarity,it's a genuine Spagatti western film really was. Leonardo did his part great.however,the script the story is hardly acceptable,let alone winning an OscarCompared to "Inglorious Bastard"This movie is just like sh#t.Killing Burning Vulgarity,it's a genuine Spagatti western film really was. Leonardo did his part great.however,the script the story is hardly acceptable,let alone winning an Oscar award. I don't like racism but what the film had portrayed is not only challenging the slavery transaction in the 1800s,but also delivery a contemptuous attitudes to both laws and human rights. Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
0
defendrojusticeDec 26, 2012
Poorly executed and predictable film. I can't say I like the idea of a spaghetti western that this film portrayed. They never even had slavery in the west. Overblown and over-dramatic.
10 of 45 users found this helpful1035
All this user's reviews
5
Jessied44Dec 26, 2012
I always have mixed feelings about Tarantino movies as his view of the world just feels too negative and/or snarky to be one in which I want to live but Wow can the man use a camera. Having said that, I did enjoy Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill.I always have mixed feelings about Tarantino movies as his view of the world just feels too negative and/or snarky to be one in which I want to live but Wow can the man use a camera. Having said that, I did enjoy Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill. Django doesn't equal those films. He has simply gone a bridge too far with the blood and vengeance while twisting his characters into caricatures. There are exciting acting and visual moments, but they probably aren't worth the popcorn unless splashing blood and torture really does it for you. Expand
2 of 9 users found this helpful27
All this user's reviews
3
OsborneLVJan 13, 2013
The movie is too damned long, Im a big time fan of most of Quentin's films but he has passed his prime sadly, first with inglorious basterds, and now this. It's a shame, the movie should of ended about 45 minutes before it did, I wanted soThe movie is too damned long, Im a big time fan of most of Quentin's films but he has passed his prime sadly, first with inglorious basterds, and now this. It's a shame, the movie should of ended about 45 minutes before it did, I wanted so bad to leave the theater. don't get me wrong the movie had great moments, but the editing of it was poor, for the last 30+ minutes all I could think was when is this thing going to be over - sadly a great movie turned irritating and left me pissed off by the time the credits rolled. everyone else left the theater in the same mindset. This should of been a director's cut, not a theater production, seems like Quentin went outta his way to put him self in the movie and add as much scenes as possible that were simply not needed. Expand
2 of 9 users found this helpful27
All this user's reviews
3
EludiumQ36May 11, 2013
The genres listed for this film are: Action, Adventure, Drama, Crime, Western. Wrong on adventure and wrong on crime (yes, lots of criminal acts but it's not about crime/solving crime), and it should include: parody and satire. TarantinoThe genres listed for this film are: Action, Adventure, Drama, Crime, Western. Wrong on adventure and wrong on crime (yes, lots of criminal acts but it's not about crime/solving crime), and it should include: parody and satire. Tarantino definitely has a signature method of directing but it always seems juvenile, never maturing. I recognize alot of people dig his films and that's fine but I can't recommend them for their shallow, excessive violence and shallow caricature characters. Expand
1 of 5 users found this helpful14
All this user's reviews
9
kurasanwichDec 28, 2012
better/comparable to inglorious basterds. not as good as KB, PF, RD, DP, or JB. waltz carried the film and when he goes so does the film. still compared to the rest of hollywood its a 9. compared to tarantino its a 7.
1 of 5 users found this helpful14
All this user's reviews
10
heavyweighthoweDec 29, 2012
The thing that I love about Tarantino (and subsequently about this movie) is that he makes the film that HE wants to make, not the film that anyone else would want him to make. This movie is fantastic specifically because it doesn't followThe thing that I love about Tarantino (and subsequently about this movie) is that he makes the film that HE wants to make, not the film that anyone else would want him to make. This movie is fantastic specifically because it doesn't follow any tried-and-true Hollywood recipe for success, like so many other movies have been doing lately. Is it a comedy? Sort of. Is it a drama? Sort of. Is it a revenge flick? Well, yeah. It does actually fit in that category pretty good, but overall it doesn't really fit in an easy genre. People are complaining it isn't funny enough, to which I say, "Funny enough for what? Who promised you funny? If you want funny, or any other "single genre" movie, you're in the wrong movie." The only classification it unquestionably fits into is that it is a Quentin Tarantino movie, and that's what makes Tarantino great. If it weren't for him, a movie like this would never get made and we would all live sadder lives. Expand
1 of 5 users found this helpful14
All this user's reviews
3
madeleineJan 11, 2013
Tackles the issue of race relations before the American Civil War more honestly than most recent Westerns, but the violence is too graphic - unwatchable or tedious - and with very little of the usual Tarantino characterisation, it's aTackles the issue of race relations before the American Civil War more honestly than most recent Westerns, but the violence is too graphic - unwatchable or tedious - and with very little of the usual Tarantino characterisation, it's a disappointment. Most of the characters are pure pastiche and the plot is nonsense. Just like 'Kill Bill' this feels like a project that QT was too in love with to handle successfully, ending up feeling more racist than otherwise to me. Not because of the 'n-word' count, but because apart from Jackson's excellent Jim Crow figure, all the other black characters are faceless and it seems as if only the ubermensch Django has any spirit (and that a psychotic one). Expand
1 of 5 users found this helpful14
All this user's reviews
3
ExKingMay 18, 2013
this movie is a Mandingo ripoff which is a movie done in the 1975 but when Quentin Tarantino
decided to re-circle the story and cash it on the fans well guess what a critically acclaimed movie.
and it's 2012 for crying out loud why we have
this movie is a Mandingo ripoff which is a movie done in the 1975 but when Quentin Tarantino
decided to re-circle the story and cash it on the fans well guess what a critically acclaimed movie.
and it's 2012 for crying out loud why we have movies about racism any more i thought we left that river dry.
it's not entertaining at all neither can be taking seriously. overall another disgusting movie by this stupid director.
Expand
1 of 5 users found this helpful14
All this user's reviews
0
snazzyjeanDec 30, 2012
This was absolutely horrific movie I have ever seen. The lanugage was so vulgar and totally unnecessary. The violence was disgusting and the display of degradation of other human beings was such I left the theater before it was over inThis was absolutely horrific movie I have ever seen. The lanugage was so vulgar and totally unnecessary. The violence was disgusting and the display of degradation of other human beings was such I left the theater before it was over in disgust. Save your money or donate to St. Jude. Expand
7 of 36 users found this helpful729
All this user's reviews
2
BonitaJan 25, 2013
It's ridiculously bloody, lacks of sensibility and courage to boldly tell a story without his Tarantino's style. Would Tarantino dare to make a film without bloody deaths and sinful torture. It's a torture itself the film. Are we supposed toIt's ridiculously bloody, lacks of sensibility and courage to boldly tell a story without his Tarantino's style. Would Tarantino dare to make a film without bloody deaths and sinful torture. It's a torture itself the film. Are we supposed to be entertained or disgusted, nauseated and bored. Expand
1 of 6 users found this helpful15
All this user's reviews
0
BartDec 29, 2012
If you like Tarentino, you will like this film. If not, it is a piece of sh*t. It is an insult to history (there was no slavery in the American west), and stupidly violent. Tarentino is a one note wonder, who keeps remaking the same films.
5 of 31 users found this helpful526
All this user's reviews