The "'They're going to make her a comfort girl.' 'What's a comfort girl... oh'" dialog made me wonder if John Rabe was an inspiration. Both John Rabe and Dr. King are German, and John Rabe was portrayed as bearded in The City of Life and Death.

Yeah, I loved the interplay between DiCaprio and Jackson. I loved Jackson's role as he was the clear power behind the throne under the guise of a servant would occasionally overstep his bounds.

And I didn't realize DiCaprio really cut his hand in the dinner scene. I was wondering where all that blood came from and thought it was a holdover from a portion of the scene that might have been edited.

I don't see how anyone can say DiCaprio or Shannon is better - to me they're both on the level of being exceptional - one isn't better than the other - they're simply both badasses....as well asa some others that were recently mentioned.

I guess I'll have to wait for QT's director's cut, if it ever comes out.

I have to say that, all-in-all, I didn't like this film as much as I had hoped I would. The film fell flat, to me, after the final scene at Candie's house. Up until that point, I was enjoying the film, but once , the spell was broken. Kerry Washington's character was a big waste - I don't believe she said five words through the whole movie.

This makes the 2nd film in a row (Inglorious Basterds being the first) from Tarantino that I disfavored "as a whole." Both films had great scenes, but the sum of its parts couldn't drive it all home for me.

If Tarantino was serious about ending his career soon, I think it would be for the best. He's too concerned now about camp than about solid substance. He could be great - in my mind - if he took his films more serious, instead of over-the-topness.

This is, of course, my opinion, but I think he's catering to the action junkies more so than anybody else. Yes, he still has great dialog and interaction, but that's where it ends for me.

This scene is fucking brilliant.

There really isn't that much action in here. Don't know what you're talking about whenever it comes to catering action junkies. But now that user who you are, you're Buttmunker.. Fucked up reality man. Yep, Buttmunker.

Act obtuse all you want, but when you have exaggerated blood splatter all over the place, like it was some video game, I don't know what else to call it other than campy action scenes.

Sometimes, it takes multiple viewings to really, truly appreciate a film. I keep watching this film, and I think it's great! What I called 'camp,' I now call 'theatrical styling!' Quentin has to put a stylish stamp on his films (like the sunglasses on Django which weren't even invented yet), to give it a cool look and feel.

I love this film, I truly do. Freakin' Sam Jackson is a riot! ("You puttin' that n***er in the Big House?!")

I would definitely double-dip for a new edition that contains a director's cut. I'm sure a lot of rich and poignant dialog between characters were cut for time.

"You want me to shake your hand?"
"I insist."

I wonder if Leo had something up his sleeve, but I somehow doubt it. This is a scene where both characters are long-pressing their luck. And neither had any left to press.

I also viewed this again recently and I do not agree with your new analysis.

I still agree with what you said below.

It's gotta be a hard job to be a film reviewer because, depending on your mood, or how fast a picture goes, your opinion can always be different.

It took me three separate viewings to like Braveheart. Didn't care for it the first two times, but people said I was crazy, so I tried it a third, and it hit me the right way. I can't explain how these things happen, but people can be very overly critical or nonplussed over a film one moment, and overly excited about it the next.

My first opinion was my true opinion upon first viewing. But my newfound love for the film, and its repeatability, is a true opinion as well. Which do you go by? Guess you go with the one you personally agree with.

Finally noticed where he cut his hand. About 4:24 in he busts a glass and it must have been a real one. Amazing he didn't break character as much as the glass. No one said anything and they just kept going.

Found it far superior to Lincoln. With Lincoln the performances were great but it was pretty boring after the first 20 minutes

I finally saw it, too, but I wonder if Leo's whole "hand-cutting/staying-in-character" story was just internet fodder? I mean, they wound up incorporating that blood into where he smears it across Kerry Washington's face. So if it was true that he cut his hand, they figured, okay, let's not redo the scene, but after Leo's hand heals up, we'll put fake blood on his hand so he can smear it across Washington's face?

If so they're all in on it. Skip to 5:32 (can't embed with pre-determined times I guess)

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/JMUhaCXPyg8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

The shot of him smearing the blood on Washington's face was an obvious second take; the blood completely changes and he's no longer clutching his fingers to the wound.

Just watched this again this past weekend (2nd time) it sucked..........just kidding. I actually like it even more now....I found myself just soaking up the dialogue more - there's some great stuff in there. Lots of little subtle lines that really make it.

The bloodbath later on never gets old either

I'm totally with'ya, brother! The more you watch this movie, the more you love it. Great dialog, and I love how Django says goodbye to King at the end of the film. Really heartfelt, because Django knew that the man did everything he could to help him, despite his being a white man.

...and the scenes where they're together (King and Django), and "I Got A Name" starts up...that really brings their bonding together.

And I love the side-eye that Django often gives to people in the film.