sammy (10 out of 10 ) I saw the movie and can't help but noticed that the script was followed to the letter. Screenplay and direction both amazing. Done by the same person - QT.
TedCab (5 out of 10 ) Tarantino is a cynical madman who has created a genre that will plague Hollywood and the movie-going public for years to come, makes the atmosphere in the movie industry unsafe for serious writers. His work defines the concept of "fad." Django is a routine revenge fantasy requiring much suspension of disbelief, is too long by a third, is deeply degrading to the spirit. His excess violence is absurd, deadens the senses, deprives human suffering of any meaning. His hysterical writing style is at least original, but his dialogue is eclectic and poorly differentiates his characters. Best that can be said is he has vitality.
Tibletcat (9 out of 10 ) @TedCab- Did you mean his dialoge is eccentric? (or really eclectic)?
Randomoniem (8 out of 10 ) It was an awesome read. Formatting was a bit off, but it took nothing away from the content. @Sammy there were definitely some differences from the movie and the scripts. @TedCab if he was just a fad he wouldn't have been around for this long. You might not like his work, but at least respect it for what it is.
will (10 out of 10 ) @tebcat if you know what true cinema is then you would have realised that he had changed cinema since pulp fiction and that his style is going to be violent and could be uncomfortable for some viewers but as he quoted "Sure, Kill Bill's a violent movie. But it's a Tarantino movie. You don't go to see Metallica and ask the f*****s to turn the music down.".
Stephen Dedalus (1 out of 10 ) @TedCab, You have nailed Tarantino perfectly. He is the definition of a hack-- derivative, gimmicky, self-indulgent, juvenile. He only impresses fanboys and critics-- two groups who always think they are smarter than everyone else when in fact they are tragically unaware of their own intellectual weaknesses. Is this really what we want the future of film to be? "Homages" to 70s kung fu movies or spaghetti westerns or blaxploitation films or 60s dirty dozen films or grindhouse films? I thought art was supposed to create new experiences not endlessly recycle old ones. Critics like Tarantino because they can put their film theory degree to use and play spot the reference in his movies and fanboys like him because they have little or no knowledge of anything before Tarantino and his puerile sensibility is right on their level. I won't even get into his offensive use of racist language for cheap shock effect.
Jamie Head (10 out of 10 ) Are we so political correct as a society that we cannot tell a story using the language of the time? A great read, only difficulty in the script was the many characters that were difficult to follow at times. Act 1 great Act 2 didn't maintain momentum as well as I'd like. Act 3 super duper. This will be used as a great teaching tool.
Nick (9 out of 10 ) Granted, the "Oscars" aren't the end all and be all of what is actually great in movies, but the fact, if I remember correctly, that he won for best original screenplay for this must mean something right? When I go into a Tarantino movie, I know to suspend some belief. He's going to have great dialogue, usually excessive language and violence and be quite over the top. That's who he is and it's great. Not everyone wants to read the film adaptations of Twilight or is snobby enough to think that because of swearing and violence that it isn't "art".
Butcher (9 out of 10 ) @TedCab and @Stephen Dedalus. You guys are so wrong. Worrying about the man's writing will make you less of a screenwriter yourself. He's having fun, and he's fantastic.
Harry Governick (5 out of 10 ) I agree with @TedCab and @Stephen Dedalus. I would further add that apart from his writing, Tarantino epitomizes moral decay in modern times. Fortunately, as all fads do, his will burn out.
Bloodbath (10 out of 10 ) Quentin should have made the movie he wrote. The Billy Crash fight, interaction with Timmy, the cut scenes with the Austrailians and the last gunfight are better in the script than what we got in the finished movie. When I first saw the movie I thought Jamie's character was not fleshed out enough, there was something missing/lacking and after reading the original script I can see why. I wish Tarantino puts out an alternate version using more from the original. I loved the movie so much that I don't mind a longer version of 4 or more hours.
Cameron Rice (10 out of 10 ) Django unchained is AWESOME, it is full of crazy action, and I absolutely LOVE the big candyland shootout at the end, that is one of the best action sequences I've ever watched.
Joe Bellomo (8 out of 10 ) Tarantino's movies epitomize American cinema with their over-the-top violence, language, and lengthiness. His movies basically sum up subgenres of film (crime, blaxploitation, dirty-dozen, kung fu, spaghetti western) in an entirely unique way. While many criticize his films for being unoriginal, I find his style of writing to be completely original and I always have a blast watching one of his movies or reading one of his scripts.
Cameron (10 out of 10 ) Django unchained was AWESOME, it was basically red dead redemption: the movie because it was pure action from start to finish and I LOVED the big candy land shootout at the end, THAT WAS AMAZING, I will tell you though, django unchained and kill bill volume 1 are the ONLY tarantino flicks I like.
RoyalewithCheese (9 out of 10 ) @Harry Governick @TedCab @Stephen Dedalus Oh get over yourselves. Hyper-violent films were around before Tarantino and are not obligatorily devoid of substance, Quentin did an awesome job content-wise both in Django and in Inglourious Basterds. I'm sure there were stuck-up people who got up in arms for movies like Clockwork Orange and The Thing as well and look where they are nowadays. You can throw meaningless expressions like "moral decay" and "spiritual degradation" all around if you want, but matter of factly, Tarantino movies have quality, even though they're not your cup of tea. They're at least a tad well-made. And seriously, about the "moral decay in modern times" thing, just. Ugh, don't.
Mauri (3 out of 10 ) Not really that good. A very boring non-creative script. Predictable since the beginning. Tarantino gold-years are over (in case he really had them once) and all his work is equal to the before one. An unnecessary movie, just stupid-fun that bores people. If you liked it, I'm sorry.
Wyatt (2 out of 10 ) Just reading the posts of the people who praise Tarantino you can tell how intellectually childish and unthinking his fans are. His movies are painfully stupid and his "humor" is cheap and low and easy. He does the same thing every time a bride/Jewish soldier/slave is wronged by assassins/Nazis/slaveowners and seeks revenge. Same plot, same tedious monologues that fanboys think are "cool." That this guy is given awards shows the sorry state of American cinema.
Pacifier (8 out of 10 ) @Wyatt. If you have a problem with the "sorry" state of American cinema, then quit your bitching and go help revitalize it. But wait, you won't. All of you that have negative comments to it, quit your bitching and go write and make a better film. He's got awards and you don't, so shut it.
Patrick (10 out of 10 ) One of the best movie ever. I think it would be great to have the scenes with Timmy and Billy Crash.
Wyatt (3 out of 10 ) @Pacifier, your feeble, juvenile response is about what I expect from Taranteenyboppers. Can't defend the quality of your hero's work so you resort to a schoolyard taunt. His films are right on your emotional and intellectual level. I don't have to make a better film. People like Kurosawa, Leone, Scorsese, Kubrick, Huston, and the countless other, better filmmakers that Tarantino has ripped off, have already made better films, but you and your stunted kind wouldn't have the taste or sense to know it.
KFDD (5 out of 10 ) A very good movie, but the script's quality aren't so good.
Jeff (3 out of 10 ) I actually have to divide this movie in half for rating it: 1st half- 5, 2nd half- 1. As bad as the ending is, I almost rated the entire thing a one, but then had to remember that the first half was somewhat entertaining. It got more, "Tarantinoed," the longer it went on. I remember in '94, when a couple of my friends told me I needed to go see, "Pulp Fiction," because of how great it was. Well, I went and almost walked out. Thought it was awful! Maybe my expectations were too high, but after seeing a couple more Q movies, I doubt it. Fortunately, '94 also produced, "Forrest Gump," "The Lion King," and my all-time favorite movie, "The Shawshank Redemption." So not all was lost.
Mustachio (8 out of 10 ) Who are all these penises who come to the comment board for a script of a movie they hate, just to drop a bunch of faux intellectual insults about the work of the writer and the state of modern culture. Look, I think Michael Bay is an idiot, but what kind of pathetic basement-dwelling booger-eater would I be to go hunt down one of his scripts, only to insult him and the people who like his work by posting some holier-than-thou bullshit. This isn't intelligent discourse. It just makes you look sad and lonely. And for the record, Quentin Tarantino has won two Oscars, been nominated for five altogether, presided as the head judge at Cannes, and is responsible for setting in motion a pretty sizable trend in both indie and mainstream filmmaking over the last twenty-ish years--so, all opinions aside, you're out of your goddamn mind if you think he means nothing to the long-term film dialogue.
GregM (9 out of 10 ) @Stephen Dedalus Tarantino doesn't pretend to be something he's not. He's a fanboy himself paying homage to his favourite film genres. That's the beauty of a creative industry, there is room for all styles of film making. It's obvious from his films that he's having fun and enjoying himself. He's not making a realistic gritty drama! Maybe you should take a look at your own 'intellectual weakness' of not knowing when to watch a film and appreciating the raw entertainment. Or if you really do insist on spouting your pretentious crap bugger off to the 'Black Swan' script, I'm sure they'll love you over there.
Dunpeal (10 out of 10 ) @Wyatt What are you on about? Kill Bill is a revenge plot, Beatrix wanted to kill everyone. Django Unchained isn't a revenge film at all. Django had no plan to seek revenge his only desire was to rescue his wife like the German story that Dr. Schultz told. The fact that Calvine Candie and the others were killed was because Django and Dr. Schultzs' plan was exposed and Dr. Schultz shot Calvin. Inglorious Basterds is a war film, yes it has revenge themes but it does not fit perfectly into the "revenge" genre which you've obviously placed it in. Also you've named three (four if you count Kill Bill Vol 2) of Tarintino's films. What about Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, Jackie Brown, and Death Proof? Don't think they fall into the "same thing every time" pattern you've explained. Excuse me but hardly any of the directors you mentioned did completely original work. Leone ripped off Kurosawa's "Yojimbo" with "A Fist Full of Dollars", Scorsese ripped off "Infernal Affairs" to make "The Departed", almost all of Kubrick's work has always been a book turned film - never a original script in there, and "Ran" by Kurosawa was based off of Shakespeare's "King Lear". I should also mention four out of the five directors you mentioned are dead so I doubt they are personally doing anything to improve modern film. Surely someone as elitist as you knew that though or did you just mention some of the most influential directors on an imdb list? Since the only one who is alive is Scorsese maybe you should step up, help him, and show us all an original story and how it should be made. To call Tarintino's films "Painfully stupid" and his fans "intellectually childish and unthinking" is just ignorant. His scripts, whilst sampling other stories, are original (excluding Jackie Brown) and passionately well crafted. He has a style, something that the directors you mentioned had/have, it's not for everyone this is true but to bash it and call people who like it names is pointless. Great script, enjoyable characters and wonderful pacing. Great read.
Rex Kramer (10 out of 10 ) If you're on here to talk shite about QT, then have the guts to post a link to the scripts that you've written. I won't hold my breath, twats.
pulpsmith (10 out of 10 ) I my self have watched movies all my life. I do not know much about the theory or concept about building an equilibrium or structuring a good narrative within a script, all I really know is what makes a good movie. QT is the perfect example of a person obsessed with watching films and in no way has he ever tried to hide the fact he isn't. Every movie he makes is taken from what he has experienced over the years watching the movies he loves, luckily for people who love his work he had the talent to be able to take an idea from multiple films and make it his own. Once again he does not hide the fact that he does this. He is a man inspired by movies, probably one of the world's biggest movie fans. He also loves great music and you can tell when watching his work many of his famous scenes were inspired just by listening to a song. When people say his work is childish and then always throw the same directors into the mix Leone, Scorsese, Kubrick. To me in my personal opinion he is all these directors because that is what inspires him to create great cinema. He is a nerd with a thousand movie plots rushing through his brain but still has the ability to take these ideas and make them his own, but all that aside he is also a pioneer with his ability to be able to write superb dialogue and create some of cinema's best on screen banter by completely stepping outside the actual movie narrative. He has had the nerve to step into almost every movie genre and I personally believe he has done a pretty damn good job of it, not only that, every attempt has been an original script apart from Jackie Brown. I don't know much about directors but I can't imagine many have achieved this, if any. For me Django Unchained will always be remembered as one of the best westerns ever made and he even gave it an original touch by adding the extreme slave theme which took a lot of nerve in modern cinema. But that's what QT does well. Other producers and directors are thinking inside the box, QT steps outside it and plays a little game of what if. Even inspired by movies his style of movie making his is own. You know when you have watched a QT movie and he sticks to that style and to me it is flawless. Even when approached by big company names and is offered millions to make big budget films he sticks to his guns and makes the movies he wants to make, the reason for this is he is not just in it for the money, he is in it because he truly loves cinema and I believe when he finally decides he has nothing left or believes he can't come up with an original idea or a modern twist on a classic genre he will simply call it a day. Yes they all have violence in but that's what he does and he does it better than anyone in cinema today. As you can tell I am not verbally the best at expressing my feelings but if you have just come on this site to write a bad review on QT because you are an ignorant c@:t why bother? People who like QT will not change their opinion of him because you come up with the same negative reviews that every QT hater comes up with and we have heard it all before yes you are entitled to your opinion but it's always the same one that he is childish and immature and has no real ideas that are his own. He pays homage to the movies he and we love and that is what he does but he does it with a modern and original style and that is why most QT fans enjoy his work because unless someone takes his place no one will ever do it better than QT. P.S. the script was class.
Paul (8 out of 10 ) And for all you critics of this work. Look where QT is and where you're not. Enough said. Write and become successful or shut up.
Ashon (10 out of 10 ) @Paul. Well said. All the critics who don't like the script or movie, write something you would want to see. Stop spending time knocking QT and make something you like. That's what QT does and he's at the top. So make moves haters. Make moves. @Mustachio you had me rollin at pathetic basement-dwelling booger-eater.. Get em.
Jay (5 out of 10 ) To all the 2 out of 10's what's a good script to read that's good all the way through?
Chelsea (8 out of 10 ) If you're going to complain about Quentin Tarantino's originality (Err, for lack of a better term? But in all honesty), you might want to tell that to his numerous Oscar Awards. I'm not a major Tarantino fan when it comes to his films, but his scripts are always a blast to read, and he really is one of the most creative writers/directors out there. Between him and Burton I draw a conclusion that they are nothing short of fun, and in most cases, inspiring. They're definitely the ones to watch when you're an aspiring filmmaker.
Splinter (10 out of 10 ) I don't get how some people can talk badly about a writer that is famous. He's famous for a reason, to be one of those 1% that thinks his movies is bad is just childish. The story had a lot of context, it was amazing, and without a doubt the best movie of 2012. If anyone disagrees, please do, if someone doesn't, please give your own opinion. My simple opinion is the fact that Django Unchained is a masterpiece, of one of the greatest writers of our time, Quentin Tarantino.
Ajay (8 out of 10 ) Tarantino has once again entertained us. But, as his avid fan, I hope that he drops his 'cliche for revenge' in his next work of art. Too sad that won't be The Hateful Eight.
Vladimir (7 out of 10 ) I'm not a QT fan at all. I hated Kill bill and enjoyed PFiction. Django is a real good entertaining movie and a very funny one. The script is well written. QT uses the Three acts structure with a Mid point and so and so. Some Points in the movie/script were too easy. Essentaly on the second part when Django conveiced the 3 white men to help him to arrest the brothers. And the final scenes where he kills everyone, are just a QT fun scenes. I'm not concerned by them, I think some people are. I had a lat of fun and it was very entertaining. But not awesome.
Kam (9 out of 10 ) Stephen, his peers in the industry love his work as well, so saying its just fanboys and critics is incorrect. If you hate his work, why are you here? Nothing better to do than troll? How sad.
Kam (9 out of 10 ) Harry, he's been around for like 20 years. That's not a fad. That's not a blip. That's a trend. If you dislike his work, why are you here?
Cameron (10 out of 10 ) Taken goes west is how I'd describe it, except 5x more violent.
Fleurette M Van Gulden (7 out of 10 ) I loved the movie. The script is not formatted. It's clear Tarantino wrote it his way to suit his directing and shooting because he's his own boss. Didn't need a reader to decide it's for the trash because he didn't grip them in the first ten or fifteen minutes. Every rule of screenplay is broken. Exposition is death, he includes information and back stories that other writers must convey is dialogue, action. He uses words like he hears, he remembers. And trow in information on characters in so many words. SURELY NO BREVITY. Doesn't matter, in the end he delivers a darn good film, way past two hours even though it's not an epic.
Jack (10 out of 10 ) Great film, people who gave low ratings disliked the film subjectively and got so mad at how many people love the film and Tarantino's other work they had to find something to ramble with, this film has more than one million ratings on iMDB with a positive score of 8. 4, unless half of million of them are critics, and the other half being so called "fanboys", this movie wouldn't have such a high rating if all of your arguements are true. Not all movies has to have any mind blowing plot twists or hard-to-understand story lines, essentially Tarantino likes the idea of "something going wrong", from Reservoir Dogs up until his latest work The Hateful Eight, he has always used it as an important part of all his movies, something ridiculous and quite unlikely to happen, actually happens, in Reservoir Dogs, they had a rat in the crew and the cop Mr. Orange got shot in the stomach, Pulp Fiction, gun went off in the car on the middle of the streets, Butch stopping for red light and sees Marsellus passing, Mia overdosing, Inglourious Basterds, it's the meeting that went really really wrong in the tavern, and this case Django, is the rescue went wrong where Stephen found out that they were only there for the girl and had not intention for playing 12 thousand for the fighter, and of course Dr. Schultz not handling his emotions well and shot Calvin in the chest. If you really don't like his work, don't even bother watching, next time when you see a Tarantino movie, just don't watch it, and even if you do, don't come to a site(or maybe several considering how much resentment are in your comments like Tarantino did something unforgivable) just to find bad things to talk about it like he's poisonous or he's making it difficult for real writers or even just saying how much you don't like it, it doesn't help you, cause something will happen and it did, become a shit show of people from two sides personally insulting each other for having different opinions which never leads to a conclusion of who's actually right. The Bride was on a revenge path because her new life was ruined and furthermore her baby died, Django didn't even personally know Calvin Candie(only by name), he just wanted his wife back really badly as you can see he's having hallucinations of his wife around him and etc. Quentin just likes to do movies that's more or less already been done before(what haven't?) but in his very own unique way, and he's making it for himself really, people just happens to like what he likes too, that's why he's so successful, and if you don't like it, do something in your life that's constructive and stop wasting time.