Spike Lee Goes in: "Django is disrespectful to my ancestors".....

[Will Ross]

Some of the most racist white people are the ones that grow up around us.

 

[GetInTheTruck]

Spike is right. I'm not black, but I'm not Jewish either and I understand and respect how the Jews look at the holocaust as "sacred" in the sense that it's something that will always be remembered and never taken for granted or made a mockery of. Whenever somebody is going to cover the holocaust for any reason, they think twice. I respect that.

Black folk: it doesn't bother y'all that some white director is over there making millions off a tragedy that damn near destroyed your people? Help me understand, because if you disagree and say hey it's only a movie, it should at least rub you the wrong way a little bit, imo. How can you go watch, and enoy a movie where some slave master is over there abusing his "property?" I dunno man, QT is a dope director, but he seems a little too comfortable.

 

[Broke Wave]

fukk spike lee... it's just a fukking movie... nikka mad that he hasn't had a hot movie since I was a fetus


People here are so blinded by race that they can't even see when one director is being a salty piece of shyt.


I would rather fukk with QT over overrated ass spike lee any day of the week... QT is an infinitely more intelligent man and probably the furthest from a racist you'll see out of all the big directors. This the type of shyt that sets nikkas back because when we start accusing people of cism like Quintin fukking Tarrantino... who has been outspoken in defense of black people and black causes for 2 DECADES... we start losing steam... fukk him and Denzel and anyone else I don't know them.

 

[ECA]

I'm black, and I can't wait to see this piff. Tarantino da GAWD

nikkas getting offended by a Tarantino movie in 2012

 

[GetInTheTruck]

fukk spike lee... it's just a fukking movie... nikka mad that he hasn't had a hot movie since I was a fetus

yeah, but look at how upset Christians were about passion of the christ when that came out....and that's a movie based on a religious figure. These kinds of movies are based on documented history, and tragedies that affected millions of people, so how can you fault spike for saying it doesn't sit well with him?

look at how pissed off Muslims around the world get when people disrespect the Prophet....not saying they should start to incite riots, but imagine the kind of power black folk could wield if they let it be known that they aint playing that shyt. People here always complain about how nobody respects black people....well, this is part of the reason why. There's nothing wrong with demanding respect...why tear down Spike for demanding his?

 

[Broke Wave]

yeah, but look at how upset Christians were about passion of the christ when that came out....and that's a movie based on a religious figure. These kinds of movies are based on documented history, and tragedies that affected millions of people, so how can you fault spike for saying it doesn't sit well with him?

look at how pissed off Muslims around the world get when people disrespect the Prophet....not saying they should start to incite riots, but imagine the kind of power black folk could wield if they let it be known that they aint playing that shyt. People here always complain about how nobody respects black people....well, this is part of the reason why. There's nothing wrong with demanding respect...why tear down Spike for demanding his?

Because this movie paints slaves in a POSITIVE light... and is not meant to disrespect the legacy of slavery or slaves at all... It is supposed to be an uplifting movie with a little Tarantino black-comedy infused in it. The disrespect of the prophet is meant to incite violence and is supposed to be a finger in the eye to Muslims... this is supposed to be an interesting fictional take on slavery where the antagonists are racist white slave owners.

I saw this movie too... it was fukking brilliant

 

[AnonymityX1000]

That's a fair point, however in black rising up and moving past adversity, 80% of the time it's through a white "savior" that helps them reach their goals. It's say to us subconsciously that we're inferior and we can't help ourselves.

80% is that a stat you got somewhere or did you just make it up?
What's the % on the other way around, where a white protagonist can't get something done without the help of someone Black or a minority?

 

[Black Hans]

I remember when I was a cashier. This Black guy was trying to get of out the store through a cashier line, and he bumped into this Mexican who was waiting in line . The Mexican dude was regular customer, and he sort of felt comfortable with me.

As it happened, I looked at the Black guy and shook my head. The Mexican guy looks at me and says something like, "Stupid ******s think they own the world or something, I ain't scared of him". At that time, I had was really tired of all wildness , racism and recklessness that I saw at the store, and mainly from blacks. I responded by saying, "yeah fukk em".

That's the type of talk that I've heard most of the time.

Growing up in the 209, Naturally everyone says nikka (all races), that is just the culture out there. I even said it a lot when I lived out there because It is okay for people like me to say it. I would never say it outside of that area.

I'm talking about people using it as a derogatory word.

Has "this time" every really ended for you?

 

[Danie84]

First, Spike Lee is one of my heroes.

Second, I'm huge QT fan.

Third, why would the release this movie on Xmas day?

It's like an inside joke I'm not getting.

 

[Fillerguy]

Because this movie paints slaves in a POSITIVE light... and is not meant to disrespect the legacy of slavery or slaves at all... It is supposed to be an uplifting movie with a little Tarantino black-comedy infused in it. The disrespect of the prophet is meant to incite violence and is supposed to be a finger in the eye to Muslims... this is supposed to be an interesting fictional take on slavery where the antagonists are racist white slave owners.

I saw this movie too... it was fukking brilliant

Django is "unchained" and goes around killing white folks. Breh, this is one of the ways whites justified slavery... to control the wild negroes. Basterds would've gotten just as much criticism if Hitler lost because the Nazi's were robbed out of all their war funding. He's playing up our scenario type for fun and profit.

 

[GetInTheTruck]

Because this movie paints slaves in a POSITIVE light... and is not meant to disrespect the legacy of slavery or slaves at all... It is supposed to be an uplifting movie with a little Tarantino black-comedy infused in it. The disrespect of the prophet is meant to incite violence and is supposed to be a finger in the eye to Muslims... this is supposed to be an interesting fictional take on slavery where the antagonists are racist white slave owners.

I saw this movie too... it was fukking brilliant

It doesn't matter if the movie can be considered to be brilliant from an artistic standpoint, slavery is serious business, and IMO whites should feel like they have to think twice about making a movie like this. The fact that they don't feel like they have to take the feelings of black people into consideration before putting these kinds of films out there is kind of the point. Like I said, QT seems a little too comfortable to me.

When spike shyts on Tyler Perry people cheer him on, when he has just as valid a point for saying he has a problem with django unchained, he gets hate for it? I don't get it breh.

 

[SuburbanPimp]

I'm a fan of movies that make you uncomfortable or uneasy. I respect Spike Lee's stance too. I will see it eventually, and I'm surprised Spike Lee haven't made a film in reference to slavery. Its one of the most controversial, intriguing, interesting periods of Country's history but yet the only real movies about is "Roots"

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

 

[MaccabeanRebel]

I wonder what sam jackson feels about the whole situtation..I mean him and spike are both morehouse brothas so I wonder if Sam has some insight about the direction of the film that makes him want to be apart of it (and play a house nicca afterall).

 

[daze23]

yeah, but look at how upset Christians were about passion of the christ when that came out....

I seem to remember the joooze not liking that movie, and Mel in general...

 

[The Real]

yeah, but look at how upset Christians were about passion of the christ when that came out....and that's a movie based on a religious figure. These kinds of movies are based on documented history, and tragedies that affected millions of people, so how can you fault spike for saying it doesn't sit well with him?

look at how pissed off Muslims around the world get when people disrespect the Prophet....not saying they should start to incite riots, but imagine the kind of power black folk could wield if they let it be known that they aint playing that shyt. People here always complain about how nobody respects black people....well, this is part of the reason why. There's nothing wrong with demanding respect...why tear down Spike for demanding his?

I think you make an important point. We don't want to cheapen or exploit historical or present-day suffering that we don't fully understand or respect. On the other hand, though, we don't want to end up with provincialism where people can only comment or create art on their own experiences, as if there's an absolute and unbridgeable divide between groups. I came upon this quote by post-colonial thinker/professor Gayatri Spivak recently that expands on this issue a bit. It's about white liberals commenting on "third world" issues, but speaks to the larger discussion.

“I will have an undergraduate class, let’s say a young white male student, politically-correct, who will say: ‘I am only a bourgeois white male, I can’t speak.’ In that situation - it’s peculiar, because I am in the position of power and their teacher and, on the other hand, I am not a bourgeois white male - I say to them: ‘Why not develop a certain degree of rage against the history that has written such an abject script for you that you are silenced?’ Then you begin to investigate what it is that silences you, rather than take this very determinist position-since my skin colour is this, since my sex is this, I cannot speak. […] From this position, then, I say you will of course not speak in the same way about the Third World material, but if you make it your task not only to learn what is going on there through language, through specific programmes of study, but also at the same time through a historical critique of your position as the investigating person, then you will have earned the right to criticize, you be heard. When you take the position of not doing your homework- “I will not criticize because of my accident of birth, the historical accident” - that is the much more pernicious position. In one way, you take a risk to criticize, of criticizing something which is Other - something which you used to dominate. I say that you have to take a certain risk: to say “I won’t criticize” is salving your conscience, and allowing you not to do any homework. On the other hand, if you criticize having earned the right to do so, then you are indeed taking a risk and you will probably be made welcome, and can hope to be judged with respect.”

Gayatri Spivak interviewed by Sneja Gunew. ‘Questions of Multiculturalism.’ in The Post-Colonial Critic. p. 62-3.