Re: Just saw Django [MERGED]
Cosign you two brothers.
I have a question for those who have not and will not see 'Django' and agree with Spike Lee's assertion that the film is "disrespectful" to our ancestors yet he did not see it:
Without having seen 'Django', how can you reconcile your "outrage" over the film, which factors in pre Civil War Whites calling slaves derogatory names, yet support a classic movie like 'Bamboozled' where the biggest wigger in the world Michael Rapport constantly called other Black people ******* and the placard was this:
By the way, don't get too cocky with your answer as I carefully worded my question.
I've posted this before but I'll use it to address your question:
Qt said he wanted to make a WESTERN but using the antebellum south with a slave plantation as his setting THATS where the point of contention comes in.
again..something like that you did not see in his big WW2 The Jews Strike Back epic Inglorious Basterds.
THAT is the point I'm making. Jews wouldn't not only tolerate using the holocaust as a backdrop for an action film it wouldn't even occur to most people to do something like that. It either didn't occur to tarantino or he consciously avoided staging his war film in an Auschwitz setting.
In the beginning I was kinda hyped to see django unchained but my position now is evolving and
I can see how people can take offense to it on principle. The native american community wouldn't appreciate an action/fantasy movie that used The Trail Of Tears as a backdrop.
Somethings should be seen for what they were and not used for escapist entertainment purposes...thats why Schindler's List was done almost documentary style and not as a thriller. And when people talk about the holocaust in entertainment media its in hushed respectful tones.
Now QT THINKS he's being respectful by portraying the brutality of slavery in america but his concept of doing a western but with slavery in the background as a motivating force for the characters is out of pocket at best regardless of good intentions.
I mean if we're going to use horrible episodes of human history as settings for fictional action stories then lets do them all..if django unchained can be made and win major awards then when is the big holocaust action film going to be made (complete with emaciated jews with hollowed eyed stares and hopeless look about them?)
How about 911 with a recreation of the towers being hit and coming down..while we're at it I'm sure theres a great thriller story that can use the Newtown Massacre as its setting..26 kids still get killed but this time the principal of the school gets into an exciting john woo style shootout with adam lanza and they both kill each other.
Now if you think ANY of those ideas are offensive but stlll think django unchained is just a movie then sherlock holmes couldn't give you a clue
As far as Bamboozled is concerned that was Spike's heavy handed commentary on race and entertainment media. The point of his film was to illustrate how racist hollywood has been and is. Its pointed satire.
Tarantino wasn't making a satirical look at slavery and society and its larger role and meaning his is just an action/comedy revenge play using historical events as a backdrop.
As for the use of the n-word thats not my nitpick since I understand the context and period of the film.
X-Man26, you perv! Over there overselling shit.
lol.
