Oooooooh, that's a Bingo!Nautical Honors Society said:Short answer, no. Long answer no it is not racist.
Not only this but it's very obviously a fantastic film.
Spot on, Bob!
Oooooooh, that's a Bingo!Nautical Honors Society said:Short answer, no. Long answer no it is not racist.
What are you going on about? You think that black people are suddenly going to become remorseless killing machines after watching Django? The same way video games cause young, stupid people to start school shootings? You might want to review your prejudices.Daaaah Whoosh said:Not to be racist, but I am a bit worried that some black people may walk away from Django thinking that it's a good idea to murder white people and blow up their houses, because then you'll get a wife and some fancy clothes, and overall a pretty happy ending. But I guess that's the world we live in, where anything, no matter how thought-provoking and good-intentioned can turn into an elementary school massacre.
Yeah, tell me about it. Didn't even think it was a spoiler until you pointed it out then it finally dawned on my that "that one bit" was probably a big enough plot twist to take some of the fun out.Dana22 said:Oh god fucking dammit Bob, you forgot the spoiler alert. Everything was pretty fine until "that one bit".
I loved how that hit some media outlets over the weekend with "OMG Tarantino's bizarre rant!" and some screenshots taken out of context; spend a few minutes actually watching the interview, and you see how much Guru-Murthy was trying to bait him. "So violence, why do people like violent films, why do you make violent films, violence, violence, what about your responsibilities as a filmmaker using all this violence, do you think there's a link between violent films and psychopaths, violence, violence?"Anoni Mus said:Tarentino is savvy.
Does anyone know if there's a topic for this interview? This guy is awesome.
I think part of Bobs point is that Django ISN'T simple, that it actually is genuinely about something. Bob said in his review that Django is actually pretty down to earth when compared to, say, Kill Bill, because since the slavery era was already such a violent period of American history, Tarantino didn't have to make that much up.hermes200 said:I am confused (haven't seen Django yet), but is this not the same argument that can be used for Inglorious Bastards; i.e. that the oversimplification and cartoonization of a dramatic period and the protagonists makes the power fantasy backlash on its intent? So, I guess Django is as racist as Inglorious Bastards was antisemitic. Or is it that nazis are a valid karmic target for people, while white colonial landlords are not?
I am genuinely curious, since I didn't like the way the power fantasy plays on Inglorious Bastards, but I got that it was not meant to be an historical reconstruction; so I don't really get where the Spike Lee comments come from.
Well, I suppose I see your point. I guess I'm just worried about the young, stupid black people. The rest of them are probably fine, just like I'm sure the rest of the world that isn't young or stupid probably won't do much harm.PainInTheAssInternet said:What are you going on about? You think that black people are suddenly going to become remorseless killing machines after watching Django? The same way video games cause young, stupid people to start school shootings? You might want to review your prejudices.
I believe it was Alexander Dumas, author of Count of Monte Cristo, and the Three Musketeers, and who was also black.Xman490 said:Dr. Schultz added another literary reference by quoting a philosopher (whose name I forget) who spoke out against slavery or abuse right before...
shooting Candie instead of shaking Candie's hand, sparking the gun fight that seemed to end the movie.
I wonder if some of those guys have ever seen an un-censored episode of the Boondocks. I would be very surprised if the average episode wasn't as dense with the N-word as Django is, if not more so.josh4president said:The guys over at Spill.com are still banging on about how this movie was "just an excuse for Tarantino to use the N-word" so I doubt this controversy is going away anytime soon.
Liked the movie just fine, myself. Would like to see Samuel L. Jackson get some very deserved props for infusing so much sheer hate into his character.
Actually, what *people* (not the nebulous, evil cabal of "Hollywood," which is a meaningless word anyway you're using to group a bunch of people together to create some sort of silly conspiracy) are angry about is the fact that the Senate report on the CIA's use of torture recently came out, and it turns out that torture was NOT used in the effective manner portrayed in the film. People are angry that the director and producers decided to rely on the CIA itself for information, fostering a relationship with its spokespeople for that information, and essentially getting misled in the process into making a film that portrays torture being used in the hunt for bin Laden in a manner that is factually untrue.RJ 17 said:Of course Spike Lee was going to be against this movie...it's a movie about black people (well, person in this case) and he didn't make it.
On a bit of a tangent: evidently a lot of people in Hollywood are pissed off at the director of Zero Dark Thirty because the director didn't use the movie to openly criticize "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques" torture.
So apparently if your movie isn't openly pushing liberal/progressive messages, Hollywood's gonna be upset with you.