Showing posts with label Jonah Hill. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jonah Hill. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 26, 2012

Django Unchained: How Tarantino Brought Catcher Freeman to Life

"Knock'em dead, kid"
I've never been a fan of Jamie Foxx. I always felt he was way too cocky for his own good, despite being clearly, if middlingly, multi-talented. That said, Foxx has made some decent movies, cockiness notwithstanding. With Django Unchained, he's finally at the center of a movie that matches the flair for cockiness and dramatic vulnerability that has defined his roles since his turn as Ray Charles. It just so happens that he does so in a movie most of us thought we'd never see: a live action version of the Legend of Catcher Freeman.

Django Unchained is unquestionably Tarantino's stab at bringing a Boondocks episode to life, right down to Samuel L. Jackson playing Uncle Ruckus. And what a magnificent stab it is. Django, like Inglorious Basterds before it, is the best kind of revisionist fantasy: violent, hilarious, and surprisingly sobering--all of which are expected from Tarantino. That Django is a ridiculously audacious sort-of masterpiece is no surprise, what is a surprise is the sheer fact that Tarantino can make audiences laugh so consistently at the single ugliest era of American history while still making them cringe. legitimately Granted, some members of the audience are gonna cringe at the buckets of blood Tarantino throws at the screen, but even more will cringe at the real, and occasionally exaggerated-but not too exaggerated--treatment of African-American slaves during the height of the Antebellum Era, an amazing feat that makes Django one of the most affecting--far more than the trailers would lead the audience to believe--exploitation homages in years.

With Django, as with most of his work, Tarantino takes a simple plot and runs with it in the most audience-pleasing manner possible. It all begins with German bounty hunter, Dr. King Schultz (played with immeasurable charm and grace by the consistently exceptional Christoph Waltz)--indeed, the irony of that character is not lost--and his search for a particularly nasty band of outlaws, The Brittle Brothers. In search of a way to identify the Brittles, the enlightened Schultz, who is positively baffled by this slavery malarkey, "purchases" former runaway slave Django (Foxx) on the condition that he will "free" Django if he helps him find the Brittle brothers. Their pursuit of the Brittle siblings leads the two to form a fruitful, long-term mentor-mentee partnership and begin a journey to save Django's wife, Broomhilda (Kerry Washington), who resides in hellish Candieland plantation in the heart of Mississippi run by dandy Calvin Candie's (Leonardo Dicaprio finally looking like he's having fun on screen) and house negro supreme, Stephen (a particularly evil Samuel L. Jackson knocking the Uncle Ruckus impression out the park).

As to be expected of a Tarantino enterprise, Django is an alternatively talky and violent affair elevated by amazing performances. At two hours and twenty minutes, much of Django's runtime is devoted to the colorful diatribes between the equally vibrant characters, though the dialogue is far more pointed and careful, considering the time period and the lack of widespread pop culture touchstones that would usually pepper Tarantino's dialogue. Of course, the big to-do over the dialogue is Tarantino's furious use of "nigger", which is essentially much to do about nothing considering this is a tale about a slave turned bounty hunter in the Antebellum South. If Tarantino didn't allow his characters to use nigger he would be courting the greater danger of being inauthentic; thus rendering much of Django's effectiveness mute by neutering the antagonists and diminishing the quality of the conflict. Indeed, some in the audience will be offended by Tarantino's flagrant, racially-charged expletive fest, but this is par for the course with Tarantino as is the ultraviolence on display. 

Within the first ten minutes, a horse's and a man's heads are decimated in a manner that is so gloriously over-the-top that it long jumps over realism into the realm of Looney Toon violence. While most of the violence is cartoonish enough for reasonable audience members to dismiss, there are moments of brutality that no matter how exaggerated will make even the boldest viewers flinch, but it is all done in a way to emphasize the cruelty of the characters rather than glorifying gore for the sake of gore. For all intents and purposes, the violence in Django is more punctuation than pure spectacle--though it is undoubtedly spectacle--and it is only relentless in bursts, which should be heartening for those with weak stomachs. However, audience members who are thinking about seeing Django should inform themselves about Tarantino's work before making the choice to see this flick. 

Dialogue and violence aside, Django is enlivened by uniformly strong performances with the real standouts being Samuel L. Jackson, Christoph Waltz, and Leonardo DiCaprio. Jamie Foxx may take top billing but he's saddled with a typically stoic hero, albeit one with more pain behind his eyes than the average hero, who doesn't really become larger than life until the climax, and Kerry Washington is a tad underutilized in the damsel-in-distress role. Meanwhile, Jackson, Waltz, and DiCaprio get to have all the fun playing outsized characters. Jackson is particularly entertaining as the repugnant Stephen, an evil, quick-witted slave who runs Candieland with greater efficiency and cruelty than DiCaprio's "slave master". Stephen's dialogue is so vitriolic that he Jackson seems to spit every word, but it also teeters into inexplicably modern Sam Jackson, BAMF, territory that it becomes unsettlingly comical. Waltz, on the other hand, is consistently appealing as Schultz, the total flipside of his relentless but no less affable Col. Landa. Schultz is almost the living embodiment of white guilt, to a fault, and he displays overwhelming earnestness and grace that counters the duplicitous hospitality of the Southern gentility. Schultz effectively serves as a counterpoint to every slave master he and Django encounter, especially DiCaprio's Candie. Candie is the result of what would have become of Amsterdam Vallon if he embraced the ways of Bill the Butcher. He is a devilish fop with an affinity for Mandingo fights and humiliating his slaves. He is probably, and sadly, the most fun character DiCaprio has played on screen.  In fact, this may be the most DiCaprio has ever smiled in a film since Titanic. DiCaprio, Waltz, and Jackson may run away with the show, but even "bit players" like Don Johnson and Jonah Hill shine in small roles. 

From performances to plot, every ounce of Django is masterful. Tarantino shows great maturity and restraint here, opting to tone down, but not eliminate, some of his trademark flourishes like the 70s score and old school on-screen graphics while delivering some great shots of the frontier. Yet, for all the mastery on display, I can't help but think all of the ground covered in Django was addressed with the same audacity, humor and violence in the Boondocks' "Legend of Catcher Freeman" episode, not to mention the Dave Chapelle's time traveling pimps who pleasantly introduced slave owners to a pistol.  By the same token, Samuel L. Jackson's Stephen is Uncle Ruckus through and through, just a bit more foul-mouthed. That's not to say that Django isn't a welcome addition to the canon of slave vengeance narratives; it's just not as original as it seems. But, what is? Still, it is an unabashed pleasure to watch a film as well-crafted and entertaining as Django based around the simple premise of a former slave dispensing righteous vengeance on his "masters". As Django says, "what's not love?"

Tuesday, February 21, 2012

Review - 21 Jumpstreet


Grade: B-

Yang: Relentlessly entertaining, sometimes sharp, and darn near uproarious. Tatum, Hill and Cube play versions of their typical archetypes with a solid degree of near-parody. Offers a few entertaining non-surprises.

Yin: Juvenile humor is unrelenting and will surely sour members of the audience expecting something more than a parody remake, but they should know better

In-Between: 21 Jumpstreet officially ends with a shot to the neck

There is no way this should have worked.

A hipper-than-thou self-aware remake of a three-decade old gimmick procedural with a scowling Ice Cube, Channing Tatum being Channing Tatum (and making jokes), a slim Jonah Hill playing the "straight man", and slight commentary on today’s over-aspiring teens should not work.

But, somehow—mostly through a deft combination of brash, relentless humor and affectionate parody—Phil Lord and Chris Miller’s big-screen remake of 21 Jumpstreet proves to be one of the most entertaining flicks of this young year.

21 Jumpstreet takes the 80’s Johnny Depp Vehicle and runs wide left, eschewing the original show’s earnestness and topicality for a, mostly, relentless stream of sight gags and penis jokes. As bad as that sounds, the approach brings 21 Jumpstreet closer to the off-the-wall loopiness of 2005’s Starsky and Hutch remake than 2002’s dour Mod Squad rehash.

Lord and Miller’s version follows rookie cops Jenko (Channing Tatum) Schmidt (Jonah Hill), two underachievers who are making a real go at being the worst cops ever to have been sworn in. Jenko can barely recite the Miranda Rights while Schmidt constantly chokes in the face of pressure. The root of these ne’er do wells’ abject failure is linked to their high school experience, where Schmidt was a shy nerd and Jenko was the dumbest of all of dumb jocks. Luckily, Jenko and Schmidt still look exactly like they did when they graduated from high school seven years prior—though Jenko’s full–grown frame would strain credulity--which makes them perfectly qualified for an undercover unit that sends youthful cops into high schools to uncover major crimes. Under the leadership of Ice Cube’s perpetually grouchy and abrasive Captain Dickson, Jenko and Schmidt are charged with infiltrating a group of teen dealers led by the younger Franco—Dave, looking every bit like older brother James from his Freaks and Geeks days--who are slinging a designer drug with probably the best name for an illicit substance, ever. The deeper Jenko and Schmidt fall into their roles, the more they learn that the high school landscape has changed significantly in half a decade.

What makes the 21 Jumpstreet work is a collection performances by a cast that plays precisely to type. Ice Cube scowls and makes edgy racial comments and slurs. Channing Tatum plays a red-blooded, hot-headed meathead with limited intelligence. Jonah Hill is the awkwardly sly nice guy who can sneak a burn in without missing a step. And…well, let’s just say everybody plays heavily on the archetypes that have defined most of their careers to a tee, and beyond. Thus, you don’t see a great deal of depth in the performances—and why should we—but it’s funny to see these character types played out to a humorous, if not logical, ends. By letting these archetypes loose in a narrative that doesn’t actually “respect” the archetypes, the characters and the performance actually become more effective for stepping squarely into the realm of near-parody.

By embracing the inherent ridiculousness of the characters and the premise, 21 Jumpstreet follows the path worn by remakes like the Brady Bunch and Starsky and Hutch. Not that any of the original shows couldn’t be translated into respectable dramatic fare; it’s just that the original premises are so ingrained in our cultural conscious as relics of a bygone era that treating them with any degree of earnestness would quickly lead to derision. 21 Jumpstreet sidesteps that problem by embracing the absurdity and letting the low-brow jokes flow fast and furious, with only a lull post-midpoint.

Granted, the humor isn’t always the sharpest, but it is relentless to the point that you’ll be hard pressed to not laugh at something. That said, 21 Jumpstreet is ribald and crude to a fault, and anyone expecting this to be a revelatory masterwork should try to measure their expectations a bit more carefully. The flick even manages a few surprises that may not be particularly shocking but are solidly. If anything, that’s what this flick does fairly well; it entertains, and how much more can one ask from a remake of an 80s teen cop procedural from a studio that has probably run out of new ideas.