in hindsight people forgot how big his movies, but in reality he has no classics, but a lot of stuff people say are classic aren't clasics either just shyt they like
Bad Boys the first one is a classic to me, but Bad Boys 2 gets more recognition even though it's not has funny with terrible pacing
If he would've played Neo it would have had his classic right there, reeves is a terrible actor
Django fukk that movie and Tarentino, he did a good right turning that bullshyt down
why not make a movie about Bass Reeves a real person instead of a mockery of the slavery in cartoonish fashion
He was no doubt a mentor, but he ain't really teach him much when it came to shooting. Jamie was a natural..you see the awe in Shultz's eyes when he's making those shots. He dominates as far as dialogue goes but he's always touching base with Django. The D is silent even checks him during the D'Artagnan scene.
Amongst the two Schultz is definitely the boss, but as an audience member I see the movie in a new light with Django being the main guy. Idk man...it's that weed . King was p*ssyfooting that whole trip to Candyland...Django would've murked everyone on the spot.
in hindsight people forgot how big his movies, but in reality he has no classics, but a lot of stuff people say are classic aren't clasics either just shyt they like
Bad Boys the first one is a classic to me, but Bad Boys 2 gets more recognition even though it's not has funny with terrible pacing
If he would've played Neo it would have had his classic right there, reeves is a terrible actor
Django fukk that movie and Tarentino, he did a good right turning that bullshyt down
why not make a movie about Bass Reeves a real person instead of a mockery of the slavery in cartoonish fashion
30 or 40 years from now when we talk about the best ACTORS in the 90's or the 2000's Will Smith is on the short list with dudes like Jamie Foxx, Johnny Depp, Leo Dicaprio, Brad Pitt, Christian Bale, etc.
30 or 40 years from now when we talk about the best MOVIES in the 90's or the 2000's....are we naming ANY Will Smith movie? I dont think we are, and thats unfortunate.
30 or 40 years from now when we talk about the best ACTORS in the 90's or the 2000's Will Smith is on the short list with dudes like Jamie Foxx, Johnny Depp, Leo Dicaprio, Brad Pitt, Christian Bale, etc.
30 or 40 years from now when we talk about the best MOVIES in the 90's or the 2000's....are we naming ANY Will Smith movie? I dont think we are, and thats unfortunate.
I have this on DVD & still turn to it every time it comes on TV. This is a great film with high replay value. Isn't a typical Will Smith movie either. It seems kind of forgotten on his resume. Only movie on his resume I would consider classic.
Will makes a lot of entertaining movies though. That seems what he goes for.
I would like to see Will focus not only on the biggest projects available, but the best projects available as well. Really should have did Django. It would not hurt his status as a leading man. Dicaprio wasn't like "we need to expand Candie's role to the beginning of the film.
QT "Well Leo, you see, Django will be meeting you at a different point in the film."
Dicaprio "No we need Candie as the leading man"
QT "It doesn't make sense"
Dicaprio "Doesn't matter"
Word? See I read he wanted it the character of Django to be more how he was at the end of the movie not the beginning which is an issue Jamie had as well
the movie became so much better once that perspective hit me. Especially when Schultz said it was his obligation as a german to help save Brumhilda...it was such a tiny thing but that part of that scene became really important with how I see it now
He was no doubt a mentor, but he ain't really teach him much when it came to shooting. Jamie was a natural..you see the awe in Shultz's eyes when he's making those shots. He dominates as far as dialogue goes but he's always touching base with Django. The D is silent even checks him during the D'Artagnan scene.
Amongst the two Schultz is definitely the boss, but as an audience member I see the movie in a new light with Django being the main guy. Idk man...it's that weed . King was p*ssyfooting that whole trip to Candyland...Django would've murked everyone on the spot.
Basically. It's a movie about him growing into becoming that guy. Schultz isn't the star in my eyes once that scene comes because he's taking over. He's being aggressive rather than reactive and Schultz risks life and limb to help him out
Here's the thing. In Spaghetti Western's the "2nd main character" is usually the more charismatic one.
Just like in For a Few Dollars More. Clint was the lead, it was his show. However, it was Lee Van Cleef's Colonel Mortimer that really was the sparkplug of that film. Clint held it down and did his thing as the typical strong, but silent type.
It's the same with the Good, Bad and Ugly. It's Clint running the show. However, its Eli Wallach's Tuco that is the film's sparkplug.
In Once Upon A Time in the West its Cheyenne who is the most interesting. But Charles Bronon's Harmonica is the lead who is the most badass.
Those characters are always the more "interesting" one . But its only one top dog.
Even in small films like "The Great Silence" or "Navajo Joe" it was the wildcard villain that was more interesting.
The problem a lot of people had was that it was applying Spaghetti Western storytelling......to a slave narrative.
People (not me) just wasnt feeling Django following behind Schultz's lead.
Django always had it in him to be the top dog he was just beaten down from losing his wife and the suffering he went through. He ALWAYS had it in him to take charge and be the lead. He was just low key and a smooth operator. He showed initiative when he helped Broomhilda try to escape. Its the same when he was "negotiating" for Broomhilda to not get whooped. He always had the mouthpiece. However, when Schultz was around he just "played the quiet one"
He was "that cowboy"
Similar to how Eastwood and Bronson would "go along" with things for so long.
It was Django who showed restraint when D'Artangan was killed. It was Schultz who started to have a mental breakdown. It was ultimately Schultz who "couldnt resist" the urge to follow through on a plan.
Will Smith problem was he was so caught up in
wanting to be the guy that kills Leo DiCaprio
When in reality QT wrote it like that to show irony in Schultz ultimately being the one who cant handle things.
Schultz is the charismatic gunslinger in the west. But once he hit the deep south in Mississippi he was a horrified man that "couldnt resist". Django is the one capable of true survival and with the capability to take control. Schultz just did a great job in building him back him and honing his skills.
Also
The chick in the red bandana stared at Django like she knew him from somewhere when she saw him entering the plantation on the horse. The next scene of her is looking at a picture of a young white girl and a young black boy
Tarantino doesnt leave things by mistake. Its believed that was supposed to be the first hint of Django's mysterious background.
It's hard for me to watch Will Smith movies....I used to have no problem letting Independence Day play in the background or Bad Boys 1 0r 2. He's just a little too annoying to really watch year to year.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
. King was p*ssyfooting that whole trip to Candyland...Django would've murked everyone on the spot.
