The filled is film with jokes about slavery, and Blacks. The film begs the audience to laugh at slave ignorance and c00nery. It also wants us to laugh at how ridiculous those pale faces with hoods are...Asking us to find humor in a group that would go on to massacre, rape, oppress Blacks for the next 120 years.
A good 2/3 of the film is spent explaining why slaves are inferior to whites or are best compared to animals; even Django adopts this mentality under the German's request. I'm sure QT went through all the possible plot scenarios and found the mythical "mandingo fights" to suit his story the best but why not include some counter anti-slavery dialogue. I guess not even the slaves back then thought negroes were worth a damn in the head.
In reality, white racists believed Black men were violent creatures that needed to be controlled. If said negro wasn't controlled or was freed, White families were in danger, particularly white women. No only does Django fulfill our modern angry Black man archetype to a T (understandably), he goes on a killing spree. Once Django obtains his "reward", he continues this killing spree and even takes out an innocent white woman, the pale face on that farm who was nice to his girl.
QT tried to sell Django as a Black heroThe German was more disturbed by slavery than Django. Yeah yeah Django was used to it but that doesnt mean it shouldn't bother him. Django was more concerned with his wife than the slaves he went out his way to shyt on slaves to appease Candy. If QT wanted to make a Black hero, Django would've at least empathize with the other slaves. He would've made Django inadvertently spark a slave revolt, throwing everything Candy said about slaves back in his face. Django would've gained his own freedom and he would've killed Candy. Instead we have a White man freeing Django and destroying the man who is the sole cause of Django's pain. The White man giveth and taketh.
And I could go on
You do have a house-****** mentality though. I don't feel the need to bite my tongue in saying that. You using the insults to dodge the valid points that I'm making is on you. Every other word out of your mouth is "nikka" and the things that you are saying are highly insulting, so I give a rat's ass about your whining. It's a cop out.
How is the movie not exploitative though? I've still yet to see an intelligent explanation for how the movie doesn't exploit slavery.
I really don't mean any personal disrespect because I don't know any of you personally. However, the above is an example of the boot-licking "yea there are some valid criticisms of the movie, but let's just be happy that the white man threw us some bones" mentality that I'm talking. Why give QT props for the raw graphic violent scenes regarding slavery when the movie isn't about educating people? He didn't put those scenes in the movie to educate people, they were there to shock and awe the audience. This is what I mean when I say that the movie exploits slavery. QT always has quite a bit of over the top violence in his movies. This movie just uses slavery as the back drop. "I've never seen 2 black men fighting to the death, a black man ripped apart by dogs on screen, or a naked slave woman pulled from a hot-box on screen". My question is, what good did it do you to see those scenes in a movie that was made purely for entertainment purposes? It's really a shame that people can't be honest or just aren't intelligent enough to see what QT really did with this movie. This movie isn't about black love, black empowerment, or anything like that. Foxx and Washington are barely on screen together. Broomhilda has more dialogue with King than she does with Django. Again, the 2 main characters in the movie are King and Candie. The black characters all play supporting roles. What white men did Django dominate? The nameless rednecks that he killed at the end? I just don't get the ass kissing over being tossed a few bones.
Well, typically action revenge movies aren't set during slavery. Typically movies don't exploit slavery to sell themselves. This is why Django is being held to a different standard. You're basically admitting that QT exploited slavery for the sole purpose of lining his pockets. He wasn't aiming to address this country's issues concerning and he wasn't aiming to start some kind of open and honest conversation about race between blacks and whites. He didn't aim to make a black empowerment movie. QT was just making a movie that would make money and decided to use slavery and the controversy that comes with it to sell said movie. He didn't make this movie to do black people a favor, so why are people acting as if he did?
Well damn, at least I'm not alone. He would have probably kept out even more real about the movie had he not been on camera. He refused to say that he even liked the movie. Respect to Wright.
///Vega+++, what a sad display of a female not swallowing.
The filled is film with jokes about slavery, and Blacks. The film begs the audience to laugh at slave ignorance and c00nery. It also wants us to laugh at how ridiculous those pale faces with hoods are...Asking us to find humor in a group that would go on to massacre, rape, oppress Blacks for the next 120 years.
A good 2/3 of the film is spent explaining why slaves are inferior to whites or are best compared to animals; even Django adopts this mentality under the German's request. I'm sure QT went through all the possible plot scenarios and found the mythical "mandingo fights" to suit his story the best but why not include some counter anti-slavery dialogue. I guess not even the slaves back then thought negroes were worth a damn in the head.
In reality, white racists believed Black men were violent creatures that needed to be controlled. If said negro wasn't controlled or was freed, White families were in danger, particularly white women. No only does Django fulfill our modern angry Black man archetype to a T (understandably), he goes on a killing spree. Once Django obtains his "reward", he continues this killing spree and even takes out an innocent white woman, the pale face on that farm who was nice to his girl.
QT tried to sell Django as a Black hero
And I could go on
you complaining about Django killing off slave owning/trading and overseer whiteys cause itsuports of to the violent blackman stereotype...if anything the Djangos's revenge on 
If anything Django going Nat Turner on those peckerwoods refutes Candy's/white supremist theory that blacks are weak and submissive slaves by nature..BTW...the poor innocent pale face lady Django blasted was a slave owner too..Just cause she was more political correct treatment of slaves doesn't mean she was a good person..Last time I checked she and her brother own the plantation and she was not only complacent in her peers brutal treatment of slaves but supported and profited off it too.You sure you aint a saltine pretending to be a cyber black militant appalled by this film?
grow the fukk up
That's bs. Only one house negro was highlighted in the film, which was Samuel Jackson's character. Django allowed treated slaves like shyt for most of the movie, his sole purpose being to get his wife, not to help the oppressed.
The one black whom was mocked for his ignorance and c00nery was Stephen the house negro....Though I didn't find his act as humorous(cause it seemsed forced) as most I wasn't offended by his charactor either cause I feel Uncle Toms are traitors to their people whom should be clowned and looked down upon..I don't think the film was trying to downplay the history of savagery of the KKK upon AAs just cause their was a comical momment with the white hate mob/horsemen...Clearly that scene was mocking the Klans ignorance and cowardice...Shultz even alluded to this after blowing up of the booby trappped horse carriage causing all the reamaining Klansmen to flee like chickens with thier head cut off.
You sure you watached the same movie? The movie itself never suggested that blacks were inferior to whites..That position was only held by the bad guys(slave owners such as Candy which is to expected)..Django never adopted that mentality...
Django ultimate goal was saving his wife 1st and foremost but clearly he cared for his other orppressed blacks too is why he spared their lives(the of the less extreme house negros ) when he went back to the plantation to kill all the whitey's left at Candyland...I would've like to see Django lead a slave revolt too but the mere fact he was able to destroy Candyland and the remaining white supremist whom ran it refutes everything Candy believed in...What makes you say the Django fighs were mythical? I need to do more research but I do think that was a very sad but real chapter of the slavery era in Amerikkka...Where do you think AAs learned to take pride in black on black violence from and the notion killing another blackman is a symbol of strenght/manhood? I think QT was right on target with that personally and i'm glad it made the film.
When Django acted indifferently toward the suffering of his fellow blacks in some secness casue he was playing a role to fool Candy and other slave holding/oveerseeing racist whties he had to interact with to find his wife...I think he thought that if he showed compassion/emotion to the brutality of slavery the racist whites would've took that as weakness and his cover would've been blown..I too wanted Django to kill Candy but i'm cool with a Shultz doing the job.
Besides Django did get to kill the slave holding cacs whom originally owned and beat him/his wife and then sold them to Candy.
If you have something to say then say it, if not then keep quiet. Don't call my name while slicking comments unless you want me to respond in kind.
If Spike had said the shyt half of us are saying about Django, I'd get why so many Blacks would feel the need to shyt on him. But Spike has barely said anything at all. shyt is sad.Jamie Foxx Goes In on Spike calls him "Irresponsible" and "Shady":
Jamie Foxx Calls Spike Lee 'Shady,' 'Irresponsible' For 'Django Unchained' Criticism
Luke, D!ck Gregory and now Jamie. That's right keep highlighting the Black Folks that disagree with Spike. Notice all 3 with the name calling. Why so emotional? Cause Spike didn't go along with the Slave Revenge Fantasy. SMH. So Jamie, Spike is irresponsible for saying "Slavery" wasn't a shoot em up Slavery Comedy Revenge Flick that it was a Holocaust. OK. LOL @ Jamie proclaiming Spike career is over, SMH. Jamie shouldn't be talking about anyone's career.
