|
|
Post by Pittsnogle_Goggins on May 11, 2020 13:13:54 GMT
Can we talk about this amazing performance please? He was always my supporting actor win for it but after a recent rewatch I just fell in love with it even more. So many small subtle details layered in. While it’s easy to see why he was overshadowed by DiCaprio (who I also thought was great) I really wish he got more recognition for it. Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on May 11, 2020 13:19:46 GMT
Utterly brilliant. Best of the cast, and should really have won the Best Supporting Actor Oscar for it. Stephen is such a vile, loathesome creation...but also very funny and nuanced. DiCaprio was very good indeed, but I thought Jackson was on another level, who was the real puppet master in the film. Waltz was very solid, though I'm not quite sure how he got singled out against those guys and won the Oscar.
At this point in their careers, Jackson was being taken for granted because he seemed to make 15 movies a year and coasted in many of them, so there was more clamour to give Leo an Oscar (like Harvey Weinstein was promising for this film), and Waltz still had that oscar afterglow from Inglorious Basterds, but Jackson always brings it for Tarantino. Shame he didn't get as much backing as his co-stars for the Oscar
|
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on May 11, 2020 13:41:11 GMT
I like him but when he really gets his big scenes towards the end the movie has spun so far off the rails that everything - including the acting - feels arbitrary. The film totally collapses with the "handshake" scene - nothing that happens after that point is logical, believable, interesting - it's a grand mistake.
Now I will say as a character he's more interesting than what he's given to play and there is a better movie where that character could be used but in the actual movie as is - it's all the Waltz/DiCaprio show - while they're still there that is.
|
|
|
|
Post by wallsofjericho on May 11, 2020 13:54:07 GMT
Best performance in the film for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by stephen on May 11, 2020 14:32:38 GMT
Jackson most definitely deserved a nomination, and he's really the only thing that keeps the movie from turning into a colossal clusterfuck after Waltz bows out.
|
|
|
|
Post by stephen on May 11, 2020 14:35:12 GMT
Utterly brilliant. Best of the cast, and should really have won the Best Supporting Actor Oscar for it. Stephen is such a vile, loathesome creation...but also very funny and nuanced. DiCaprio was very good indeed, but I thought Jackson was on another level, who was the real puppet master in the film. Waltz was very solid, though I'm not quite sure how he got singled out against those guys and won the Oscar. Waltz had the benefit of a much larger role (he's co-lead), the best scenes (arguably), and the choicest lines. Jackson's performance is much more subversive and low-key, which doesn't really help if you're up against flashier, louder roles. |
|
|
|
Post by theycallmemrfish on May 11, 2020 14:36:41 GMT
He's good, but as our resident old man already said, he takes the reigns when the film decides to jump the shark.
Luckily, Tarantino rectifies this in his next outting by giving him the best role (dingus monologue notwithstanding)... but sadly that movie is a misfire as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by TerryMontana on May 11, 2020 15:52:38 GMT
I'm the minority here but I love the movie and I prefer Leo and Waltz over SLJ. That doesn't mean, of course, that I don't like Jackson's performance. Powerful acting in a minor role.
|
|
|
|
Post by jakesully on May 11, 2020 16:48:41 GMT
Loved his performance in this (thought he was absolutely hilarious). I can't even repeat some of the shit he was spewing out cause it was so damn inappropiate & wrong haha. Also, loved how SLJ looked in it as well (felt it added to the performance).
|
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on May 11, 2020 17:14:35 GMT
Utterly brilliant. Best of the cast, and should really have won the Best Supporting Actor Oscar for it. Stephen is such a vile, loathesome creation...but also very funny and nuanced. DiCaprio was very good indeed, but I thought Jackson was on another level, who was the real puppet master in the film. Waltz was very solid, though I'm not quite sure how he got singled out against those guys and won the Oscar. Waltz had the benefit of a much larger role (he's co-lead), the best scenes (arguably), and the choicest lines. Jackson's performance is much more subversive and low-key, which doesn't really help if you're up against flashier, louder roles. I dunno. I guess I can go along with Waltz's role being bigger, but Jackson's lines and scenes stand out to me waaay more just in memory. Jackson wasn't giving a "low key" performance to me either. It was often "loud" (in a good way). It's very "scene stealing" at times. And it's arguably the most "transformational" performance in the film, something that's usually supposed to help in awards races. Waltz just kinda came off a nicer version of his Inglorious Basterds character. From his verbosity to his intonation, it didn't feel like much of a stretch. Jackson looked completely different (he darkned his skin etc), moved completely different to affect Stephen's limp and poor posture. For an actor that often gets criticised for turning up and doing his usual schtick to collect an easy paycheck, Jackson arguably went further than the rest of the cast in changing himself, so you saw "Stephen" not "Sam Jackson". |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on May 11, 2020 17:33:09 GMT
Waltz had the benefit of a much larger role (he's co-lead), the best scenes (arguably), and the choicest lines. Jackson's performance is much more subversive and low-key, which doesn't really help if you're up against flashier, louder roles. I dunno. I guess I can go along with Waltz's role being bigger, but Jackson's lines and scenes stand out to me waaay more just in memory. Jackson wasn't giving a "low key" performance to me either. It was often "loud" (in a good way). It's very "scene stealing" at times. And it's arguably the most "transformational" performance in the film, something that's usually supposed to help in awards races. Waltz just kinda came off a nicer version of his Inglorious Basterds character. From his verbosity to his intonation, it didn't feel like much of a stretch. Jackson looked completely different (he darkned his skin etc), moved completely different to affect Stephen's limp and poor posture. For an actor that often gets criticised for turning up and doing his usual schtick, Jackson arguably went further than the rest of the cast in changing himself, so you saw "Stephen" not "Sam Jackson". Jackson was loud mostly in his first scene, but compared to the overly arch theatrics surrounding him, he's not quite as arresting at first glance. It's when you realize Stephen's true nature that he becomes truly riveting, but again, by that point, the movie is losing a lot of steam. Yes, you can argue it's very transformative work (because it is) and a departure from his normal style (which it also is), but I would argue that lot of it has to do with people taking Jackson for granted. People expect him to be a staple in a Tarantino joint now, and they don't appreciate the variations he plays, particularly here. There's also a lot of studio politics going on here. Remember that Weinstein initially wanted DiCaprio to be his awards pony ("Leave DiCaprio to me", he said at Cannes). But then people saw the film (a really late entry in the season), and came away thinking that Waltz was the standout. Which makes sense, as he has by far the most screentime and the best parts of the movie involve him in some fashion. As good as Jackson is, once Stephen takes command of the movie, Django's magic has waned substantially because Tarantino blew his wad far too early. It's not Jackson's fault, and he deserved nominations over Arkin, Jones and especially De Niro. But 2012 was a murderer's row of a year for that category; I could come up with five iterations of a lineup without reusing the same actor twice and you'd have a damn fine grouping. |
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on May 11, 2020 18:42:35 GMT
He's incredible, and manages to create a wild new "villainous character", while simultaneously looking different, and more mean then we've ever seen him appear on screen. I particularly love the various "threatening" stares he gives throughout.
I'll also second the idea that he deserved more Oscar attention then either Waltz or DiCaprio. If anything he's probably overall the most consistent and best performances in the entire film.
|
|
