The Big Picture: Is Django Racist?

[invadergir]

Here is a picture of Quentin Tarantino together with actress Nichole Galicia who plays "Sheba" in Django Unchained. Note the pose and clothing. Or in one case, lack thereof. [http://24.media.tumblr.com/67e3e0460932c5877c0b4e4d4367a396/tumblr_mgoeq6mE0h1rtg4mro1_500.png]

I'm just going to leave this here. I think the irony speaks for itself.

How is it irony? Race and gender equality are two different subjects.

And Ms Galicia is completely gorgeous. Whether or not her being a model objectifies her or empowers her is for another film to tackle.

And on that note, when did Tarantino claim he was making a film about race equality. He is a fan of black culture(and black women apparently lol), but he doesn't use Django Unchained as a political statement. If anything, the white-washing of American segregation in films like "Remember the Titans" do far more harm to the black community than films like Django.

 

[brazuca]

These times the problems are all about PC (political correctness). The film uses the word ****** and negro a lot and therefore Spike Lee said it was racist. From my american histry class in college and the text I've been reading that was how african american were related. Tarantino should not use african american, that is anachronic. Also the main point of the movie is what MovieBob said. It could take another setting, but he choose that so he could do his thing.

 

[MovieBob]

Thats pretty funny.
and I don't mean asking if this movie is racist...

In general I wouldn't say so, but I would say its a terrible movie, even by Tarantino standards.
As it often happens with his movies, it mistakes sappy effecticist sentimentality for actual emotional impact or intelligent observation, but I'd say it's the worst I've seen here.
As a clarification, I find this movie (and inlorious basterds) offensive not because of the display of racism itself, or of difficult conflicts, but because of the implied "realism" faced with the grotesque ridiculization of the conflicts and characters themselves.

I agree that history and ideologic shouldn't be solely relegated to museums, and I respect making commentaries and bringing the discussion forward to everyone; but there is a clear distinction between quotes, discussion, and satire, but there is yet another broad line away from completely missing the point and doing whatever you want (In fact I'd say that Django and IB have little to do with history, and make a point out of the distortion of accepted history that we get in the media, as a subvertive tool. And only in this sense I think they are slightly better commentaries than movies... But it also misses the point). In this sense, I perfectly understand someone who cherishes history and respects a certain view from the perspective of knowledge, would find it offensive, even when it is not racist.

I personally resent the implication that we as an audience need that sort of distortion to enjoy or discuss a vision of history, are we really that dumb? To me it was fine when he portrayed a silly story with dumb characters doing stupid things (Pulp fiction, my "favourite" movie from him).

But to bring that lack of subtlety into a narrative that is perfectly engaging and interesting? for the sake of what? style? fun?
I don't think anyone can deny that he often falls (intentionally or unintentionally) into emulating bad movie clichés as "auteur" quotes of a style, which ends up infecting bad movie clichés into an actually badly paced, horribly executed pastiche that wouldn't be given a second look if it wasn't for his name in the titles. Really, Brunhilde as a subtle quote? It's as blunt as a sledgehammer to the face, the black siegrfried to slay his white dragon and bathe in his blood. Real smooth metaphoring there Bro, but that's as far as it goes...

 

[OneTwoThreeBlast]

"Fixed"? People's accents need to be "fixed" so they exactly match what you want, or you will boycot them? That's unbelievably sad and misguided. If he "fixes" it to a non-descript American accent, should all British people not watch him? If he switched to a British accent, would you not watch him, or would that be ok with you because you feel British is one of the "proper" accents? Would you mind telling us what, exactly, makes an accent proper to you? Are those traits that make them OK in your eyes shared by everyone's opinion? Or are you suggesting that Bob isn't doing well enough whenever he crosses your personal lines? I'm genuinely curious as to how you arrived at such a silly conclusion.

EDIT: the best part is that you're bringing this up in the thread for a video about racism, which is based at least partly in provincialism, xenophobia, and, ultimately, fear and/or derision of "the other." Oh sweet, sweet irony.

I don't need to read a single word past your second usage of the word fixed in quotes.

You obviously didn't take the time to read my post. I told him to either MASK THE ACCENT COMPLETELY (As he's done in plenty videos in the past.) Or to stop trying to mask it and let his accent shine through as it would normally. It is completely annoying for him to go in and out of his accent throughout a video, and if he takes his craft seriously I'd hope he'd strive to make sure it was as perfect as could be.


Of course to someone like you it's not constructive criticism, no you read a single word into my post and then begin frantically pounding the quote button. Absolutely pathetic.

Unfortunately, if you had continued reading this thread, you would have seen the post where I not only "apologize completely and unequivocally," but even mention how wrong I was and state that I will not go back and edit my previous comment, so that people can see how wrong I was (rather than being dishonest and deleting it) and so it can serve as an example of what not to do. And I explain why I became overzealous.

I believe in admitting when I'm wrong and apologizing for unwarranted criticism. The internet would be a far better, more constructive place if more people would do that.

EDIT: which isn't to say it's your fault for not reading the entire thread. Rather, I'm suggesting that it's unfortunate that my apology came several posts later.

 

[bunji]

For once I thought this was a great episode with a very rigid logical structure, but I wonder; if someone made a movie about all the black-on-black slavery that took place during this same period, would that be okay?

Do you mean the slavery in pre-colonial Africa that was the result of tribal warfare, and acted as a predeccessor to American slaver, or the odd cases of American slavery where free-blacks wound up wealthy in the south and bought slaves?

Either, I mean it was pretty balsy of Django to even have a black man be one of the villains in a movie about slavers, I felt it presented a more nuanced and interesting view of the whole mess that way. In fact, it would be interesting to see if anyone would dare to make one even about modern day slavery in africa, or the north korean labour camps in russia - somehow it seems to be more "ok" if we focus on the devilery of the white man - and though of that there is no shortage, I think we'd do well to remember that, as Yahtzee put it, people are shit. Everyone.

 

[Lionsfan]

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.

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.

Man you are so right. It's common knowledge that young, urban blacks, those inferior sons of bitches, have a hard time deciphering fiction from reality. Hell if we didn't tell them otherwise, they would probably think slavery is still around!

We'll need armed guards at every theater, maybe get some pamphlets, tell these ignorant morons, that just because it happened in a movie, doesn't mean it can happen in real life. Only then, will those lesser humans get the point

 

[Daaaah Whoosh]

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.

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.

Man you are so right. It's common knowledge that young, urban blacks, those inferior sons of bitches, have a hard time deciphering fiction from reality. Hell if we didn't tell them otherwise, they would probably think slavery is still around!

We'll need armed guards at every theater, maybe get some pamphlets, tell these ignorant morons, that just because it happened in a movie, doesn't mean it can happen in real life. Only then, will those lesser humans get the point

First of all, when I said 'young, stupid black people', I was referring to a subgroup of the group 'black people'. The point I was making was that white people would have no reason to take anything negative messages from Django, although I suppose, now that I think more about it, the stupider white people would take it as reason to shoot black people on sight, so that they don't have their family and friends murdered and blown up. The majority of the world, regardless of race, is not stupid, but I'd say a lot of them are far stupider than they should be when identifying those among them who are at risk of violent acts.
And yes, I do believe that some people, of any race, have a problem distinguishing fiction from reality. Especially highly religious people, who take the words of a book as the Gospel truth, pun intended. In all cultures, there are at least partially fictionalized heroes whose stories people use as a template for their own morality. I was trying to state earlier that in the past, heroes who fought back against the people who wronged them only achieved murderous victory at the cost of their own lives, or of something very nearly as important to them. Think of Hamlet, who murdered his uncle for murdering his father, but who was also murdered in the very same scene. The idea used to be that even though some people may have to die in order for the world to be set right, there would be no place for murderers in the new, better world that had been created. However, nowadays we are getting stories of heroes who brutally murder their enemies and walk away unscathed. I am worried that this is teaching some people that vengeance is okay, that if they kill people they don't like, they will be rewarded. Django is one of the stories I am worried about, although the fact that it's about a specifically black protagonist fighting against specifically white antagonists (and anyone who supports them), I was worried about the people who could see themselves as a black protagonist, namely, black people.
Perhaps I am being racist. That is a possibility. But if this was a movie about a white man murdering a family of black people who had kidnapped and tortured his wife, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. I'm pretty sure my point would have been inherent, that stupid white people would take it as a reason to go out and kill black people.

 

[daibakuha]

I saw this movie, and it wasn't racist. Not by a long shot.

I'll put this in spoilers because it contains spoilers. Read at your own risk please:

Django had a strong bond with Dr. King Schultz, who trained him to be the perfect bounty hunter. After Calvin Candy was killed thus his men killed Dr. King Schultz .. Django visited his corpse and thanked him for everything with sympathy and everything a man can feel for his friend. Django wasn't even racist to begin with he just killed the wrong doing men with a grudge in which he wasn't regretful about.

I mean if you think about it, are you going to feel bad for killing guys who've enslaved your race, forced your wife to have sex with them and the slaves, killed your true friend Dr. King Schultz and belittle you until they've got you killed for the sake of racism itself? Not to mention they were going to cut Django's balls off... Some can still find torturing and killing them wrong after all that, but in most cases you'd be pushed over the limit to think twice about killing those guys.

Django isn't racist and shows just how horrible slavery is. If that's racist, would you prefer if the men in the movie were all white and enslaved white people or mixed with aliens enslaving people? Could be pulled off, but this movie sends a strong message and I enjoyed it with my girlfriend. My girlfriend is actually part black and she loved it herself so what does that say?

If funny you mention enslaving of white people in a sort-of science fiction setting, because Planet of the Apes (the original) did just that.

 

[daibakuha]

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.

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.

Man you are so right. It's common knowledge that young, urban blacks, those inferior sons of bitches, have a hard time deciphering fiction from reality. Hell if we didn't tell them otherwise, they would probably think slavery is still around!

We'll need armed guards at every theater, maybe get some pamphlets, tell these ignorant morons, that just because it happened in a movie, doesn't mean it can happen in real life. Only then, will those lesser humans get the point

First of all, when I said 'young, stupid black people', I was referring to a subgroup of the group 'black people'. The point I was making was that white people would have no reason to take anything negative messages from Django, although I suppose, now that I think more about it, the stupider white people would take it as reason to shoot black people on sight, so that they don't have their family and friends murdered and blown up. The majority of the world, regardless of race, is not stupid, but I'd say a lot of them are far stupider than they should be when identifying those among them who are at risk of violent acts.
And yes, I do believe that some people, of any race, have a problem distinguishing fiction from reality. Especially highly religious people, who take the words of a book as the Gospel truth, pun intended. In all cultures, there are at least partially fictionalized heroes whose stories people use as a template for their own morality. I was trying to state earlier that in the past, heroes who fought back against the people who wronged them only achieved murderous victory at the cost of their own lives, or of something very nearly as important to them. Think of Hamlet, who murdered his uncle for murdering his father, but who was also murdered in the very same scene. The idea used to be that even though some people may have to die in order for the world to be set right, there would be no place for murderers in the new, better world that had been created. However, nowadays we are getting stories of heroes who brutally murder their enemies and walk away unscathed. I am worried that this is teaching some people that vengeance is okay, that if they kill people they don't like, they will be rewarded. Django is one of the stories I am worried about, although the fact that it's about a specifically black protagonist fighting against specifically white antagonists (and anyone who supports them), I was worried about the people who could see themselves as a black protagonist, namely, black people.
Perhaps I am being racist. That is a possibility. But if this was a movie about a white man murdering a family of black people who had kidnapped and tortured his wife, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. I'm pretty sure my point would have been inherent, that stupid white people would take it as a reason to go out and kill black people.

You've gone from full blown racism to even further down the line to borderline idiocy.

Not to even mention your rambling incoherent mess of a post was not only mind-numbingly flat, but incredibly hard to read due the lack of anything resembling proper grammar and syntax.

You also completely miss the context the movie gives for Django's actions and the fact that one of the primary protagonists is a white European dude, who, at least in the beginning, hates slavery more than Django does(or is at least more accepting of it). You would know this if you actually saw the film, instead of trying to make up and justify reasons to hate it.

 

[Ashley Blalock]

I'm southern so I've seen all the various ways people have tried to spin slavery over the years from a Disney style version that takes out all the bad parts to a topic that only people of a certain race are allowed to talk about.

Personally I loved the way Django tackled the subject. Horrible, brutal, cruel, sadistic, just a top notch way of showing slavery as a horrible institution without any redeeming qualities. A way for people to talk about slavery with all the bull taken away to say it's some of the worst stuff one human could have done to another human.

 

[Daaaah Whoosh]

You've gone from full blown racism to even further down the line to borderline idiocy.

Not to even mention your rambling incoherent mess of a post was not only mind-numbingly flat, but incredibly hard to read due the lack of anything resembling proper grammar and syntax.

You also completely miss the context the movie gives for Django's actions and the fact that one of the primary protagonists is a white European dude, who, at least in the beginning, hates slavery more than Django does(or is at least more accepting of it). You would know this if you actually saw the film, instead of trying to make up and justify reasons to hate it.

I can see I am not getting my point across. This is the last time I will try.

I do not believe I have been racist. I believe I have been politically incorrect, perhaps, but as I believe was my original point, it's hard not to appear racist when talking about a movie about slavery.

It does not matter that Django is black. What matters is that he murders a lot of people and gets away with it. He doesn't become a tragic martyr; rather, he becomes a comic hero.

I am sorry that my post was flat, I'm not used to the forum taking spaces between paragraphs. I am trying to use them now.

I am sorry that you could not understand my grammar and syntax. I have been reading Jacobean poetry lately, I find it has an adverse effect on my writing.

I don't understand what your third paragraph is even trying to say. The German DID die for what he believed, he DID sacrifice himself for his ideals, and his plan DID NOT involve murdering two dozen men, until he was pushed to the breaking point. Remember how Django got his wife back, then proceeded to wait for the rest of the plantation to return from the funeral so that he could shoot them all down in cold blood? That's called premeditated murder. He'd gotten what he wanted, he just had to go back to cause more death. Which is fine, they mostly deserved it, but Django should not have survived unharmed from the event.

I hope that proved to you that I did see the film. I don't know what more I can say.

 

[Lionsfan]

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.

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.

Man you are so right. It's common knowledge that young, urban blacks, those inferior sons of bitches, have a hard time deciphering fiction from reality. Hell if we didn't tell them otherwise, they would probably think slavery is still around!

We'll need armed guards at every theater, maybe get some pamphlets, tell these ignorant morons, that just because it happened in a movie, doesn't mean it can happen in real life. Only then, will those lesser humans get the point

First of all, when I said 'young, stupid black people', I was referring to a subgroup of the group 'black people'. The point I was making was that white people would have no reason to take anything negative messages from Django, although I suppose, now that I think more about it, the stupider white people would take it as reason to shoot black people on sight, so that they don't have their family and friends murdered and blown up. The majority of the world, regardless of race, is not stupid, but I'd say a lot of them are far stupider than they should be when identifying those among them who are at risk of violent acts.
And yes, I do believe that some people, of any race, have a problem distinguishing fiction from reality. Especially highly religious people, who take the words of a book as the Gospel truth, pun intended. In all cultures, there are at least partially fictionalized heroes whose stories people use as a template for their own morality. I was trying to state earlier that in the past, heroes who fought back against the people who wronged them only achieved murderous victory at the cost of their own lives, or of something very nearly as important to them. Think of Hamlet, who murdered his uncle for murdering his father, but who was also murdered in the very same scene. The idea used to be that even though some people may have to die in order for the world to be set right, there would be no place for murderers in the new, better world that had been created. However, nowadays we are getting stories of heroes who brutally murder their enemies and walk away unscathed. I am worried that this is teaching some people that vengeance is okay, that if they kill people they don't like, they will be rewarded. Django is one of the stories I am worried about, although the fact that it's about a specifically black protagonist fighting against specifically white antagonists (and anyone who supports them), I was worried about the people who could see themselves as a black protagonist, namely, black people.
Perhaps I am being racist. That is a possibility. But if this was a movie about a white man murdering a family of black people who had kidnapped and tortured his wife, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. I'm pretty sure my point would have been inherent, that stupid white people would take it as a reason to go out and kill black people.

It's not a "perhaps this is racist." What you've said is racist. Simply adding something about how white people might think it's ok to shoot black people doesn't change the fact that your original post you said, "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."

That's the kind of shit that pops up on Cable News, or some white supremacist site.

You didn't talk about vengeance movies in general and their effect on society, or anything like that. Your first post was about how some black people specifically might not be able to distinguish fact from reality. And in a thread chock full of semi-racist posts and very idiotic posts, yours is near the top of the list

 

[Daaaah Whoosh]

It's not a "perhaps this is racist." What you've said is racist. Simply adding something about how white people might think it's ok to shoot black people doesn't change the fact that your original post you said, "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."

That's the kind of shit that pops up on Cable News, or some white supremacist site.

You didn't talk about vengeance movies in general and their effect on society, or anything like that. Your first post was about how some black people specifically might not be able to distinguish fact from reality. And in a thread chock full of semi-racist posts and very idiotic posts, yours is near the top of the list

I just assumed that I wouldn't have to say anything about all the revenge movies that I think inspire people of other races to commit acts of genocide. I didn't think people would be racist enough to assume I think black people are inferior; I do not. I'm simply stating that since this is a movie based upon race relations, and it involves a black protagonist killing white people, I was worried about similar things happening in real life. I assumed that everyone is at least smart enough to know that movies about killing people don't tell them to also kill people unless they have some things in common with the protagonist. Since racism is still prevalent in America, and since black people are most often the ones who are on the worse side of it, I thought that many victims of modern-day racism would turn to violent means of vengeance, rather than more peaceful ones. I'm sorry if people like to jump to racist conclusions, I thought my line of reasoning was apparent.

 

[daibakuha]

You've gone from full blown racism to even further down the line to borderline idiocy.

Not to even mention your rambling incoherent mess of a post was not only mind-numbingly flat, but incredibly hard to read due the lack of anything resembling proper grammar and syntax.

You also completely miss the context the movie gives for Django's actions and the fact that one of the primary protagonists is a white European dude, who, at least in the beginning, hates slavery more than Django does(or is at least more accepting of it). You would know this if you actually saw the film, instead of trying to make up and justify reasons to hate it.

I can see I am not getting my point across. This is the last time I will try.

I do not believe I have been racist. I believe I have been politically incorrect, perhaps, but as I believe was my original point, it's hard not to appear racist when talking about a movie about slavery.

It does not matter that Django is black. What matters is that he murders a lot of people and gets away with it. He doesn't become a tragic martyr; rather, he becomes a comic hero.

I am sorry that my post was flat, I'm not used to the forum taking spaces between paragraphs. I am trying to use them now.

I am sorry that you could not understand my grammar and syntax. I have been reading Jacobean poetry lately, I find it has an adverse effect on my writing.

I don't understand what your third paragraph is even trying to say. The German DID die for what he believed, he DID sacrifice himself for his ideals, and his plan DID NOT involve murdering two dozen men, until he was pushed to the breaking point. Remember how Django got his wife back, then proceeded to wait for the rest of the plantation to return from the funeral so that he could shoot them all down in cold blood? That's called premeditated murder. He'd gotten what he wanted, he just had to go back to cause more death. Which is fine, they mostly deserved it, but Django should not have survived unharmed from the event.

I hope that proved to you that I did see the film. I don't know what more I can say.

I don't really see the point in objecting to Django killing people in cold blood a lot of action movies do the same for their heroes and don't get any slack for it. Not to mention the fact that he only really kills 2, maybe 3 people in cold blood, and that was only after they tried to kill him first. Not to mention the fact that if he didn't kill those people they would have hunted him down like an animal and probably have dogs tear him limb from limb. You also falsely state that he killed the entire plantation when he only killed three people, and their were only 5 of them to begin with (the other two were slaves he let go). He killed Candie's sister, Sam Jackson and the white moonlit walk guy.

Even-so what the law considers legal and illegal are not always the same thing as moral and immoral. Slavery was legal during a good portion of our nation's history. Even after lawful segregation basically made blacks second class citizens not guaranteed to the same rights and privileges as whites.

And I would hardly say that either him or his wife emerged from the ordeal unscathed. Django lost a close friend, and his wife was forced to have sex with people at Calvin's will. You could even take it further and say that the horrors inflicted on both of them while they were slaves was enough sacrifice.

And what you said originally was racist. You said that you were worried that young black stupid people would use this movie to justify violence against whites. You then clarified and said that you weren't just concerned about black people. Despite the fact that fictionalized violence in any medium does not inspire real life violence(and in any race, your original post stated you were afraid black people were too stupid to know the difference).

 

[Mordaris]

Short answer, no. Long answer no it is not racist.

Even longer answer: Jamie Foxx said his favorite part about the movie was getting to shoot white people. That line makes it into the movie, but he said it before the script did.

I was waiting for someone to point this quote out. Explain how someone's "favorite part about the movie was getting to shoot {skin color} people" is NOT racist, please.

 

[Khanht Cope]

Nothing racist about pompous white people over-ruling black people on why they shouldn't be upset, and what does and doesn't amount to racism. Good shit, Movie Bob!

(I haven't seen the movie, so I can't actually make any comment on whether it actually does things that reconcile affected audiences, or is just an OTT 'righteous' movie that really just indulges in the narcissism of white guilt; but that would be an important issue to weigh in the subject)

 

[Daaaah Whoosh]

I don't really see the point in objecting to Django killing people in cold blood a lot of action movies do the same for their heroes and don't get any slack for it. Not to mention the fact that he only really kills 2, maybe 3 people in cold blood, and that was only after they tried to kill him first. Not to mention the fact that if he didn't kill those people they would have hunted him down like an animal and probably have dogs tear him limb from limb. You also falsely state that he killed the entire plantation when he only killed three people, and their were only 5 of them to begin with (the other two were slaves he let go). He killed Candie's sister, Sam Jackson and the white moonlit walk guy.

Even-so what the law considers legal and illegal are not always the same thing as moral and immoral. Slavery was legal during a good portion of our nation's history. Even after lawful segregation basically made blacks second class citizens not guaranteed to the same rights and privileges as whites.

And I would hardly say that either him or his wife emerged from the ordeal unscathed. Django lost a close friend, and his wife was forced to have sex with people at Calvin's will. You could even take it further and say that the horrors inflicted on both of them while they were slaves was enough sacrifice.

And what you said originally was racist. You said that you were worried that young black stupid people would use this movie to justify violence against whites. You then clarified and said that you weren't just concerned about black people. Despite the fact that fictionalized violence in any medium does not inspire real life violence(and in any race, your original post stated you were afraid black people were too stupid to know the difference).

He kills all the white people who work at the plantation. First when they're attacking him, second when they're sitting around minding their own business, presumably so they won't attack him again.

I see your point about slavery being martyrdom enough. Also, I had not thought about how they would have been hunted down. Although I hardly see how killing a dozen more white men is going to solve that problem.

And when I said 'young black stupid people', I suppose I should have said "young stupid people who just so happen to be black". One of the many downsides of racism is that you can't put any negative adjectives next to racial adjectives without everyone thinking you're applying the former to the entirety of the latter.

As for fictionalized violence not inspiring real violence, perhaps you're right. But what about HISTORICALLY fictionalized violence? Violence based around things that ACTUALLY HAPPENED? I find that to be far more inspirational.

 

[Lionsfan]

It's not a "perhaps this is racist." What you've said is racist. Simply adding something about how white people might think it's ok to shoot black people doesn't change the fact that your original post you said, "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."

That's the kind of shit that pops up on Cable News, or some white supremacist site.

You didn't talk about vengeance movies in general and their effect on society, or anything like that. Your first post was about how some black people specifically might not be able to distinguish fact from reality. And in a thread chock full of semi-racist posts and very idiotic posts, yours is near the top of the list

I just assumed that I wouldn't have to say anything about all the revenge movies that I think inspire people of other races to commit acts of genocide. I didn't think people would be racist enough to assume I think black people are inferior; I do not. I'm simply stating that since this is a movie based upon race relations, and it involves a black protagonist killing white people, I was worried about similar things happening in real life. I assumed that everyone is at least smart enough to know that movies about killing people don't tell them to also kill people unless they have some things in common with the protagonist. Since racism is still prevalent in America, and since black people are most often the ones who are on the worse side of it, I thought that many victims of modern-day racism would turn to violent means of vengeance, rather than more peaceful ones. I'm sorry if people like to jump to racist conclusions, I thought my line of reasoning was apparent.

So I assume you'll be posting the whole "violence inspires people" thing on every violent film talked about on the Escapist, and the revenge videos as well?

Even with that line of reasoning, your first two posts were still highly racist, and you're still posting thoughts that are pretty horrible. This whole thought:

Since racism is still prevalent in America, and since black people are most often the ones who are on the worse side of it, I thought that many victims of modern-day racism would turn to violent means of vengeance, rather than more peaceful ones

is just, gah, stupid and bad. You're saying that black people can't handle a movie without trying to imitate it, something that has never happened before, because SURPRISE! Black people, even those suffering through modern-racism, are not boiling pots of hatred waiting for an excuse to start killing people

 

[PrinceOfShapeir]

Short answer, no. Long answer no it is not racist.

Even longer answer: Jamie Foxx said his favorite part about the movie was getting to shoot white people. That line makes it into the movie, but he said it before the script did.

I was waiting for someone to point this quote out. Explain how someone's "favorite part about the movie was getting to shoot {skin color} people" is NOT racist, please.

It's called black comedy. He said it on a fucking Saturday Night Live sketch. Now if it were reversed, would it be seen as racist? Yes, absolutely. Would it -actually- be racist? Doubt it. Racism requires intent in my book. Words cannot be inherently racist, although people seem to think they are considering the ridiculous temerity people demonstrate when trying to talk about the word ******.

 

[Arawn]

To all the commentators; Wow. Nice to see alot of you giving the subject much thought. It's a subject for debate, but the subject itself brings forth even more debate.

In regards to Bob: Pretty accurate analysis of the movie. The movie itself isn't racist. It doesn't glorify whites nor blacks, but it does have racism. The racist beliefs of the characters influences their behavior. Calvin and his skull bit, and D'Jango in his treatment of the slavers and slave owners. Racism is two-way street. Can't say much that hasn't already been said. I'll let the smarter people finish their bit.

But I do feel the need to look at the comment of "Killing in cold blood." I think the poster was saying that killing of the other people was unwarranted or unnecessary. At first glance it's true. But those men (plus 1 woman) he shot down were all members of the Candie Land estate. Just running away after getting his wife and they would hunt him down. More so they're the same folk that took glee in killing the d'Artagnan. They weren't innocent and kindly folk minding their own buisness. D'Jango went as far to shout that slaves name right before mowing them down. A movie about revenge killing and he kills for revenge. So there were two reason for killing them. Now for the sister, you may think the same. But just because she didn't crack the whip or release the dogs, she enjoyed the luxury of the plantation. Either she took a blind eye to it, or she just didn't care. In both cases she's like the getaway driver for a bank robbery. Sure she didn't rob the bank, but she was part of the gang in that sense. It's the same as the wife of the thief buying herself a new coat with the ill gotten funds. No one was clean, not even D'Jango himself. Killing in itself can be deemed an evil act. Yet it's acceptable when you dislike the one being killed? It's all fuzzy. In any case, it's a great movie since it gets so many people to talk in general.