scrobble.life
← Back

Title · no scrobbles indexed yet

Django

The first scrobble for this title is still propagating, but a community review is already indexed below.

Reviews

Longform community posts about this title

🎬 "Django"| Reseña Original de Marabuzal -ESP-ENG-@marabuzal252d
Permalink·Open on PeakD ↗·Linked from existing Hive post

Comments

No comments yet — be the first.

3 more reviews

  1. Film Review: Django (1966)@drax430d

    (source:  tmdb.org)

    If the spaghetti Western genre were to be distilled into a single iconic figure, it would not be the enigmatic drifter of Sergio Leone’s The Man with No Name trilogy—played by Clint Eastwood—but rather the titular protagonist of Sergio Corbucci’s Django. While Leone’s antihero, famously without a name, dominates the mythos of the genre, the moniker “Django” itself became its defining cultural shorthand. Corbucci’s 1966 film, a visceral and uncompromising entry into the genre, stands as one of the few works outside Leone’s oeuvre to achieve lasting cult status, its influence permeating decades of cinema.

    The film opens with Django (Franco Nero), a grizzled Union veteran of the US Civil War, trudging through mud with a large coffin as he approaches a border town caught between two warring factions. The town serves as a battleground between the racist paramilitaries of former Confederate Major Jackson (Eduardo Fajardo) and Mexican revolutionary forces led by General Hugo Rodriguez (José Bódalo). Before settling, Django rescues Maria (Loredana Nusciak), a mixed-race prostitute ensnared by both sides. Though initially clashing with Jackson, Django’s past ties to Rodriguez—revealed as an old ally—lead him to aid the general in seizing gold from a Mexican army fort. Yet Django’s motivations remain opaque: his vendetta against Jackson and his ambivalence toward Rodriguez’s cruelty hint at a deeper, more personal agenda. The narrative escalates into a brutal showdown where alliances fracture, and the body count rises, leaving few survivors.

    At first glance, Django appears a blatant imitation of Leone’s A Fistful of Dollars (1964), borrowing its premise of a lone gunslinger exploiting a town’s factions. Corbucci, a close associate of Leone, even replicates elements like the sympathetic bar owner (here played by Ángel Álvarez) and the mercenary protagonist. Yet, the similarities end there. While Leone’s film thrived on stylised grandeur, Corbucci’s approach is rawer. With a shoestring budget, Django lacks the polished production values of Leone’s work, but this austerity becomes its strength. The muddy landscapes, bleak lighting, and unrefined performances lend the film a visceral, documentary-like quality. Corbucci’s vision of the Old West is stripped of myth; it is a place of squalor, where morality is negotiable and survival depends on ruthless pragmatism.

    Django’s most striking feature is its unflinching depiction of violence, far exceeding the norms of 1960s cinema. Scenes of whipping prisoners, mutilations, and Jackson and his men hunting Mexican peasants for sport are rendered with clinical brutality. The film’s political undertones—Jackson’s gang, an anachronistic stand-in for the Ku Klux Klan, and Rodriguez’s equally sadistic revolutionaries—add layers of moral complexity. Corbucci, a self-proclaimed leftist, refuses to vilify one side outright; both factions are depicted as equally corrupt, reflecting his critique of institutionalised racism and authoritarianism. This explicit content led to censorship in many countries, yet it also became a marketing hook, positioning Django as a daring transgression of cinematic boundaries.

    Corbucci’s politics permeate the narrative, even as he avoids overt didacticism. The inclusion of the term “racist,” anachronistically applied to Jackson’s men, underscores the film’s contemporary relevance. Yet Corbucci’s critique extends beyond Southern bigotry: Rodriguez’s revolutionaries, while sympathetic in their opposition to oppression, are shown to be just as brutal, their power hungry and uncompromising. This balance avoids simplistic hero-villain dynamics, instead presenting a world where survival demands moral compromise.

    The film’s aesthetic is equally bold. Enzo Barboni’s cinematography and Carlo Simi’s production design craft a desolate landscape, where the mud-streaked coffin Django drags becomes a recurring symbol of death and futility. Louis Bacalov’s score, particularly the haunting ballad “Django,” elevates the film’s opening sequence into an operatic statement. The music, coupled with the iconic image of Django’s weary trek, sets a tone of existential dread that permeates the narrative.

    Franco Nero’s Django is a masterclass in screen presence. Rejecting the suave coolness of Eastwood, Nero’s portrayal is weathered and world-weary, his stoic silence and piercing gaze embodying a man haunted by his past. The actor’s insistence on ageing make-up and a distinctive hairstyle cemented both his character as an archetype and his future stardom. Nusciak’s Maria, meanwhile, adds unexpected depth as a woman dealing with exploitation by both factions. Her role transcends the typical damsel-in-distress trope, offering a rare instance of female agency in a male-dominated genre.

    Django is not without its shortcomings. The reveal of the coffin’s content comes too early, diminishing its dramatic potential. The finale, while chaotic, feels rushed and underwhelming, its climax lacking the emotional punch of Leone’s operatic set-pieces. Additionally, the film’s brisk 90-minute runtime, while contributing to its relentless pace, leaves little room for nuanced character development. Yet these flaws are outweighed by the film’s audacity and energy. Its brevity ensures it remains taut and engaging, avoiding the bloatedness that plagues some spaghetti Westerns.

    Django’s box-office success spawned a deluge of imitators, many exploiting loopholes in Italian copyright law to append “Django” to their titles. The genuine sequel, Django Strikes Again (1987), and a 2023 television series starring Matthias Schoenaerts, attest to the character’s enduring appeal. However, the film’s most profound impact lies in its influence on filmmakers like Quentin Tarantino. The infamous ear-cutting scene in Reservoir Dogs (1992) directly references Django’s similar sequence, while Tarantino’s Django Unchained (2012) is a loving homage to Corbucci’s work. Even Miike Takashi’s Sukiyaki Western Django (2007) bears its mark, further cementing the film’s status as a cornerstone of exploitation cinema.

    Django is a landmark film not merely for its place in spaghetti Western history but for its fearless exploration of violence, politics, and moral ambiguity. Corbucci’s unflinching vision, coupled with Nero’s iconic performance and Bacalov’s haunting score, creates a work that transcends its low-budget origins. While its narrative flaws and rushed pacing may disappoint some, the film’s raw energy and thematic depth ensure its status as a cult classic. For those willing to confront its unvarnished brutality, Django remains a testament to cinema’s power to shock, provoke, and endure—a true relic of its time, yet startlingly modern in its unapologetic nihilism.

    RATING: 7/10 (+++)

    Blog in Croatian https://draxblog.com Blog in English https://draxreview.wordpress.com/ InLeo blog https://inleo.io/@drax.leo

    Hiveonboard: https://hiveonboard.com?ref=drax InLeo: https://inleo.io/signup?referral=drax.leo Rising Star game: https://www.risingstargame.com?referrer=drax 1Inch: https://1inch.exchange/#/r/0x83823d8CCB74F828148258BB4457642124b1328e

    BTC donations: 1EWxiMiP6iiG9rger3NuUSd6HByaxQWafG ETH donations: 0xB305F144323b99e6f8b1d66f5D7DE78B498C32A7 BCH donations: qpvxw0jax79lhmvlgcldkzpqanf03r9cjv8y6gtmk9

    Permalink·Open on PeakD ↗·Linked from existing Hive post
  2. Django@serialfiller1221d
    Permalink·Open on PeakD ↗·Linked from existing Hive post
  3. 'Django' by Sergio Corbucci Review: Just good. Not bad, and not ugly.@namiks1467d

    vlcsnap-2022-06-21-12h11m05s066.png

    I think, for most, that when the name Django is heard, they think of the film by Django Unchained by Quentin Tarantino, oblivious to the fact that there was a film several decades prior; in fact, it was this very film that led to Tarantino creating Django Unchained, having been inspired by the old traditional westerns and the many creative faces that appeared within the genre.

    Django is a western that was released right around the western genre's peak, released around the same time as Sergio Leone's The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, as well as his other entries that are now known as the 'dollars triology'. Western films are a guilty pleasure of mine, but I can sometimes be quite picky when it comes to how I feel about them. After all, this was a genre that really started the Hollywood blockbuster style of film, resulting in a heavily oversaturated genre as everyone attempted to catch a piece of that excitement.

    It is a film I had seen before, many years prior, so long ago that I could barely remember whether I had seen it or not, only to realise during my watch that I remembered certain aspects of it, and ultimately, coming to the realisation that it is a western film that I simply do not enjoy that much; only for some mere personal reasons of which I shall attempt to explore in more detail going forward.

    vlcsnap-2022-06-20-22h36m03s783.png

    This isn't to admit that Django is a bad film, because it most certainly is not. It is certainly visually stunning throughout, with its charisma in its title opening font and music. But that charisma for style doesn't entirely translate into the narrative, one that does not particularly hold much strength. However, this is not something new or unusual to the western genre. We've seen many entries within it that display silent protagonists or characters that are seemingly incapable of dying and forever besting their foes. I feel, for the most part, that the film's failure to really win me over sits in its fast, but somewhat slow narrative that doesn't really go anywhere over its runtime.

    The film takes place shortly after the American Civil War -- a familiar settings for these films -- with a protagonist being a former Union soldier now aimlessly roaming the lands. Very quickly, our tough-guy protagonist encounters trouble, and the film continues on into a story of vengeance on a group of people that ultimately seem to be picking fights with a former soldier also looking to pick fights despite often being seen trying to "lay low" despite the weird carrying of a coffin and rain of bullets that follow him.

    It is through this that the film loses me slightly, it sets up characters that ultimately have very little weight to them. It does not seem like there really is much to be gained and lost through most of the film's drama, as our action starts and stops, starts and stops, without really displaying much reason behind any of it. Our protagonist, in my opinion, seemed to have been the reason for much of these dramatic events and outcomes. Almost encouraging everyone around him to draw their guns.

    Much like the typical 'man-with-no-name' western films, our protagonist doesn't talk much. He has a low look to him, where he rarely has interest in his surroundings and a lack of interest in interacting with others; something that seems to be a bit of a contradiction given his actions.

    vlcsnap-2022-06-20-22h48m45s484.png

    And it saddens me to speak ill of this film, because in parts it is incredibly beautiful. Ripe in its obsession with the dead. Displaying crosses both upright and leaning at all times to display the frequent number of death to be seen and met throughout this land. Almost to hint that our protagonist himself is death. The one to bring it upon those who come close to it, most deserving of it. There's plenty of other sybolism to reflect this assumption, and I feel it could've been worked into the film a bit better if it was intentional. In fact, it does remind me of another western of a similar nature: High Plains Drifter. A film that displays a town's own greed as a nomad enters the down and suddenly begins to torment its people.

    The problem in Django, is that many of the killed are not really given much character depth. It is hard to think of them as deserving in most situations, as mentioned above that it seemingly is our protagonist that initiates and encourages action. Unlike High Plains Drifter, which in a very clever manner displays the ways in which the people are deserving of the torment through the dialogue, our bad guys are merely just that. Bad guys that get shot. One after the other in waves.

    Again, I do want to state that I still enjoyed the film, and it certainly has its moments. Just that I am a little disappointed in how easily the film starts to lose you, without really giving you much to care about. The beautiful cinematography and charisma of our protagonist isn't really enough to maintain your interest. It is likely that you will find yourself getting a little bored, tired of the film and perhaps wanting to just move on and watch something else. At a runtime of over 160 minutes, it is certainly quite easy to reach that point.

    I won't write much regarding that little narrative, however. I think it's best for people to watch it and then see how they feel. With the limited narrative, it's certainly an easy film to spoil.

    vlcsnap-2022-06-21-13h08m57s313.png

    I think, particularly in today's time, it is very easy to compare western films to the huge greats. To then judge the others based on how those greats performed. It's certainly quite difficult to ensure you don't compare all of them against three or five films, and look at them on their own, even if they do to a degree copy from a particular trend and style that is already present. Django was released around the same time as the films of Sergio Leone, after all.

    But it does stand on its own two feet. I found myself really admiring certain scenes and perspectives shot from the 35mm spherical camera. The slow panning shots of empty, decayed towns overwhelmed with mud. The handheld moments of action as the camera immersively shakes -- as I have mentioned recently, the steadicam was only released in the middle of the 70s, so handheld work was quite impressive before then.

    I found that Django had its great moments, but quickly fell into mediocrity, only to attempt to revive itself and fall back into those same issues again. It certainly had the runtime to pan things out a bit more, but perhaps this was all intentional. Perhaps our protagonist was death. Roaming the lands after a now finished war in search of deserving souls needing to be punished and removed. Acting like a plague that roams these desolate lands and cleansing it of the filth that thrived before. Even if it did lose me for large parts of its runtime, I certainly can appreciate it much more with this theory.

    Though I suspect most that watch the film may not enjoy it. It won't live up to their expectations having seen the greats. I don't think many will also come to this theory regarding death as well. Ultimately leading to it becoming less known in favour of Tarantino's own creation with a similar name; and certainly more appealing to a more modern audience.

    Permalink·Open on PeakD ↗·Linked from existing Hive post