Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 467-468: Tarantino's Waltz

Back in the 1990s we documented the career of Quentin Tarantino when his second feature film Pulp Fiction was nominated for Best Picture. Since then he had an interesting career helming an adaptation of Elmore Leonard's Jackie Brown and his epic martial arts western Kill Bill. Tarantino suffered somewhat of a slump in the mid noughties with his latest offering, Death Proof going down very badly. However, he turned his fortunes around a few years later when he teamed up with a then unknown Austrian actor by the name of Christoph Waltz.

The film was Inglourious Basterds, in which Waltz makes an instant impression as the charismatically brutal Col. Hans Landa. Just like with Pulp Fiction, Tarantino's World War II movie is split into chapters that focus on different characters before bringing them altogether in a memorable finale. The film's first chapter focuses on Landa, dubbed the 'Jew Hunter' by the Nazi party, who attempts to track down a Jewish family who have so far evaded his detection. This opening scene is a testament to Waltz's power as an actor as he initially appears charming but later demonstrates Landa's brutality in all its glory. It's only after meeting the films antagonist that we meet the eponymous heroes of the piece; a Jew-scalping bunch of American soldiers let by Brad Pitt's over-the-top Aldo Raine. Raine's brand of patriotism and Nazi-scalping made him an off-putting character in my eyes and I had little sympathy for him when he found himself in a perilous situation later in the movie. In fact if Inglourious Basterds does have a sympathetic character then its cinema owner Shosanna, whose family were killed by Landa's platoon in the opening sequence. After her cinema is picked to host a Nazi premiere, Shosanna decides it's the perfect opportunity to get revenge for her family by burning her business to the ground. However, Shosanna didn't count on The Basterds also showing up with a plan of their own which involved the detonation of dynamite strapped to their inside legs. As a self-proclaimed cinema aficionado it does seem apt that Tarantino's film's big scene occurs in a movie-house however I did find the finale a little far-fetched even by the director's normal standards.

Inglourious Basterds is one of those films that has individual elements that work however its ultimately not the sum of its parts. Firstly, at almost two and a half hours, it's far too long and every scene feels a little overstretched. I can event pinpoint the moments where needless dialogue is being inserted into a scene that could've had a better rhythm to it had it not been written by Tarantino. The fact that Tarantino likes to break cinematic convention as much as possible also makes Inglorioius Basterds seem a little too full of itself. The use of modern music for example doesn't always work whilst the random wording that flashes up on the screen every so often is another trick that I found a little hard to stomach. It's quite easy for me to pinpoint which scenes that work and which don't primarily because of the chaptered structure of the film. Despite being the film's antagonist, Hans Landa's scenes are Inglourious Basterds' best as I found him to be a man that oozed charisma. The fact that he leaves the film after the first scene meant that we long to see him again which we do in small helpings elsewhere. Shosanna is another great character, a woman who utilises her knowledge of film to get her revenge on the men that had her family killed. On the flipside I found that any scenes involving the Basterds were overblown, needlessly violent and contained a performance from Brad Pitt that was bordering on a pantomime. The film also wastes great actors like Michael Fassbender and Diane Kruger by having them only appear in a handful of scenes despite both of their characters seeming interesting. I did however enjoy Melanie Laurent as the bitter but feisty Shosanna who thankfully got her fair share of screentime before her ultimate demise. But Inglourious Basterds did belong to Christoph Waltz, who won a Best Supporting Actor Oscar for portraying Landa. I think that Tarantino owes a debt of gratitude to Waltz who made the film seem a lot better than it actually was. Like it or not, Inglourious Basterds did propel Tarantino back into the mainstream and I feel that that is primarily due to Waltz's fantastic performance.


Three years later Tarantino and Waltz would reunite earning the latter another Best Supporting Actor Oscar and the former his second Best Screenwriting award. The film in question was Django Unchained and was once again a homage to one of Tarantino's favourite genres as he favoured a spaghetti western approach throughout the film. However, with the film being set in America's south, Tarantino has redubbed the film 'A Southern' and has also commented that it his look at the slavery movement. But you know when Tarantino's involved, the film is never going to be straightforward and indeed here he mixes a little social commentary alongside his usual bloody violence and superior soundtrack. The story sees Jamie Foxx's Django being freed from a chain gang by Waltz's bounty hunting Dr. King Schultz who hopes that the former slave will help him track down some wanted men. When Schultz discovers Django's aptitude for the profession of bounty hunting he takes him under his wing whilst also promising to help him locate his lost wife. The pair tracks down Django's wife to the Candyland plantation where the charming yet ruthless Calvin Candie believes that the men are looking for one of his prize fighters. From the point that Schultz and Django enter Candieland the film becomes a dangerous game as our duo face peril not only from Candie himself but also from sneaky servant Stephen. As is usually the way with modern Tarantino films, Django Unchained is about twenty minutes too long and there are some sequences that could easily have been edited down. These sequences including a comedy number including the Klu Klux Klan and a lot of the empty scenes before Django and Schultz arrive at Candieland.

Another issue I had with the final part of the film was the fact that Schultz and Candie had both been killed off in the movie's penultimate shoot-out. This was a shame as they were the two most charismatic characters in the film and without them it was left to the rather bland Django to carry the rest of the movie. Just as he was in Inglourious Basterds, Waltz is a joy to watch here with him playing a considerably more sympathetic role than he did in Tarantino's previous film. Indeed, Schultz is arguably the film's most well-rounded character as we see him go from loner bounty hunter to Django's mentor. Elsewhere it was great to see Leonardo Dicaprio in a role that saw him get to play against type as the film's main antagonist Calvin Candie. Dicaprio appeared to relish playing the role and he certainly gave an enigmatic turn to the extent that I felt he should have been put forward for the Oscar over Waltz. If there's a weak link in the film then it's Jamie Foxx, whose is seemingly outshone by his fellow performers in the lead role of Django. It's telling that when Dicaprio and Waltz aren't on screen the film dips in quality and that final twenty minutes was a chore to get through. It wasn't helped by the fact that Tarantino himself turns up as an Australian miner with his accent being one of the most questionable in cinematic history. In addition I felt that Tarantino let his old mate Samuel L Jackson get away with far too much over-acting as the sadistic Stephen. One thing I do have to applaud Tarantino for is his use of music in the film and particularly the original song written by western movie legend Ennio Morricone. The film is also visually superb with great time taken to get the look of each character right whilst the set of Candieland is similarly memorable. Whilst enjoyable, Django Unchained was far too long for my liking with Tarantino showing even less restraint than he did during Inglourious Basterds. Additionally there was less grit employed in the film with the message being lost beneath a pool of bloody corpses and an out-of-place explosion.

Having watched these two films back-to-back it does seem to me as if Tarantino really needs someone to tell him where he can slash significant portions of his films. But, whilst his films are doing well during the awards ceremonies I can't see this ever happening. I do feel that I'm in the minority when I say this but I don't think Tarantino has been at his best since the first instalment of Kill Bill. While Basterds and Django are both superior to Death Proof they're nowhere near the quality of the likes of Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs. I do feel that the main reason that Oscar honours Tarantino in the 2010s is just so they can highlight their recognition of edgier fare alongside the more prestigious period pieces and issue-based movies.

Next time we tone down the violence and look at a quirky indie comedy with two strong female characters taking centre stage.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Day 341: Non-Linear Tales from L.A.

So far the 1990s have primarily given us Best Picture nominees that are set in the past and have fairly rigid story structures. But the decade also produced some fresh voices in the world of film-making who were trying to change the face of the industry. Quentin Tarantino was one such voice whose style of direction combined stylised sequences, comic dialogue and superior soundtracks. Additionally Tarantino became known for his screenplays which were witty and often didn't obey the rules regarding linear storytelling. After a successful debut in Reservoir Dogs, Tarantino hit the big time with the Best Picture nominated Pulp Fiction. The film depicts a number of events which all relate in some way to Ving Rhames' L.A. mob boss Marsellus Wallace and a mysterious briefcase that belongs to him. The retrieval of the briefcase is a job undertaken by hitmen Jules and Vincent who both go on a voyage of discovery throughout the film. Vincent is later tasked with taken Marsellus' pretty wife Mia out on a date where they participate in the now iconic twist-dancing contest. Finally we learn the story of boxer Butch, his dad's gold watch and how he gets on Marsellus' bad side after refusing to throw a fight. Throw in The Wolf, a hold-up at a diner and an overdose and you've got the basic structure of Pulp Fiction. However, Tarantino tipped the structure of the film on its head by having the middle part of the film open and close it whilst the final scenes happened about forty-five minutes before the final credits rolled. This non-linear style really made the film stand-out as did the post-modern references which would become a regular occurrence in Tarantino's later movies. 

I remember being lent a VHS of Pulp Fiction when I was about fifteen and was blown away by the audacity of the movie. I watched it several times during my teens but this was the first time I'd revisited it in a while and I don't think its lost any of its impact. Whilst I'm not a Tarantino fanboy I still feel that his first three films were all great works that gave the film world something new. From the opening conversation between Pumpkin and Honey Bunny to the conclusion of the robbery Pulp Fiction was a compelling watch with one glaring exception. My major problem with Pulp Fiction is the story involving Butch isn't as exciting as the rest of the movie and significantly slows down the pace of the picture. I feel this is partly because Butch is a somewhat withdrawn character and partly due to the explicit nature of the scenes involving Marsellus, Zed and The Gimp. Part of the reason that Butch was given so much screentime was due to the fact that Bruce Willis was the film's biggest name and so had to be given the spotlight in what was a best a mediocre plot strand. Pulp Fiction definitely revived the career of Willis and it did the same for Travolta who needed a resurgence following his appearance in the Look Who's Talking franchise. Travolta's cool, calm and collected persona was perfectly executed as the charming yet violent hitman Vincent. Travolta proved to be an expert screen presence and was given a Best Actor nomination as a reward. Meanwhile Samuel L Jackson stole the show as the Bible-quoting Jules and made quite an impact at the Oscars when he seemed visibly annoyed that he'd lost the Best Supporting Actor prize. Uma Thurman was also nominated for her role as the flirty yet troubled Mia and she was yet another cast member who benefited from appearing in the movie. Capable support was provided by Harvey Keitel whose appearance as The Wolf stands out as one of my favourite parts of the entire film. 

Pulp Fiction is an incredibly stylish film with all of the sets and props being incredibly distinctive. All of the key characters have memorable costumes that helps mark them out and in the long term has meant that we never forget them. Another key aspect of Pulp Fiction is the fact that the film didn't have a score but rather a collection of classic songs which helped propel the action. Nobody can hear Dick Dale's Misirlou without thinking of Pulp Fiction whilst Urge Overkill's cover of 'Girl You'll be a Woman Soon' made into the charts as a result of featuring in the film. As far as Oscar success goes the film saw Tarantino win his first Best Screenplay award which in my opinion was well-deserved. It's not surprising that the film got another six nominations when you consider that it was the first movie to be entirely produced by Harvey Weinstein's Miramax company. As we've seen, Weinstein became incredibly influential throughout the decade when it came to the Oscars but in the case of Pulp Fiction is acclaim was more than deserved. But looking back I think the success of his first three films went to Tarantino's head and he lost the discipline he'd employed in his earlier works. Even his last two movies, which have been critically acclaimed, suffered from some sloppy storytelling and a number of over-indulgent scenes. Thankfully Pulp Fiction reminds of a time before Tarantino's ego got the better of him and I would say that it still stands up today as a masterpiece thanks to its funny and violent nature as well as its extremely accomplished ensemble cast. 

Next time we look at two big movie stars who decided to direct and star in two films that later went on to become Best Picture nominees.