"Django Unchained is a love Story..." Topic

…That Ranks Among Tarantino's Best.

"With all of the hullabaloo surrounding the hyper-real depiction of slavery in Quentin Tarantino's latest film Django Unchained, most people have probably not heard about what's actually most shocking about the director's latest — fantastic — movie: It's a love story.

In the two decades that Tarantino has been making films, he's had Mexican stand-offs, slick-talking gangsters, revenge plots and ultra-violence in spades. But with the possible exception of True Romance, love stories have never really been Tarantino's thing. With Django Unchained, though, he has all the stand-offs and revenge you've come to expect, but still manages to turn the story into a romantic tear-jerker. Who knew he had it in him?

But let's back up. The R-rated Django Unchained, which opens Tuesday, is still a tried-and-true Tarantino flick. Set in the South in the 1850s, the director's version of a Spaghetti Western opens with Dr. King Schultz (Christoph Waltz, who is clearly looking to one-up his Oscar-winning performance in Inglourious Basterds) bloodily "negotiating" the purchase of a slave named Django (fellow Oscar winner Jamie Foxx) from a pair of bumbling traders because the young man can help him find a trio of brothers with bounties on their heads…"
Full article here. Take note that from this point there is a minor Spoiler Alert!.

link

Are you going to see the movie?
I'm sure I will see it.

Don't miss the youtube at the end of the page.

Hope you enjoy!.

Amicalement
Armand

I like the original Django… and Tarentino… and Westerns in general… so I'm sure I'll be watching this one, sooner than later.

Good lord…."Set in the South in the 1850's"…
Wearing clothing that is 30 years into the future…(and a nice 1970's green color on that vest), and carrying a pistol that hasn't been invented… Do I even need to go further on this?…

NO I won't be seeing it…and wasting my money….

Sorry…this "film" is garbage…

I'll probably catch it at the dollar theater (but yeah, I thought it was set in the 1870s or 80s).

Tarentino apart, it's still Hollywood, Murphy, not history.

It's Tarentino, so no, I won't watch this garbage.

Yet again I shall pass a Tarentino film by.

Given Foxx's rant on SNL, and from what I've seen/heard, sounds more like an angry black man's dream sequence.

Murphy is so right about this. We can just put this film down in the same garbage pile as the following:

Julius Caesar
Hamlet
Macbeth

I'll probably go see the movie anyway though because Tarentino is one of the best directors making movies these days and made the single best WWII film I've ever seen.

I wonder how many innocents will suffer as a result of Tarentino's racist exploitation flick? If Tarentino was a really brave director he would make a factual film on Nat Turner's slave rebellion. This never to be made film on Turner could include such historical truths as follows: Turner was never able to rally more than a few dozen slaves to his cause, some of his followers were forced to participate, several slaves aided their masters in escaping the rebel's wrath, the rebels heroically slaughtered mainly women, children, and a few men, the rebellion pretty much fell apart as soon as very small numbers of white militia were sent against it, the majority of rebel slaves were captured and tried in a formal court, a number were acquitted, a number were deported to the Caribbean where the condition of slaves was much worse than Virginia, and those found guilty of the worst atrocities were executed. Such a film would never be made since it does not fit the narrative.

This is a weird thread.

I doubt it will live up to the historical accuracy of the ACW as depicted in "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly", but I'll still probably see it.

I normally enjoy Tarantino's movies, but in light of Jamie Foxx's SNL monologue (Quote below) I am going to pass on this one and vote with my wallet.

And I got a movie coming out, "Django," check it out. Leonardo DiCaprio, Samuel L. Jackson. "Django Unchained" I play a slave. How black is that? And in the movie I had to wear chains. How whack is that? But don't be worried about it because I get out the chains, I get free, I save my wife, and I kill all the white people in the movie. How great is that? And how black is that?

If I said something like that I'd be lucky to make it off stage.

Yea, I have to agree Dan.

From the trailer, it looked like a good, fun, over the top unbelievable, put your mind on pause and just enjoy, action flick.

However, given his racist rant, I too am voting with my wallet, and won't let Tarantino or Foxx make any money off of me.

Tarantino's movies are pretty schlocky, and undeserving anyway, from what I've seen of the movie trailers for them. He ranks right up their with some of the worst directors in the business, in my opinion.

There are plenty of better movies to spend your money on.

"This is a weird thread."

It's about links. Whatever follows, follows.

My goodness, there are some nervous nellies posting on this thread!

I don't expect any more historical accuracy from this than I did from the original "Django," or from any other spaghetti western for that matter. 99% of all westerns, come to think about it.

But I do expect to be entertained, and I'll be there opening day, or thereabouts.

And the short green jacket is an homage to Michael Landon's Little Joe on "Bonanza" – another historically inaccurate western. :)

its a movie,a drama, not a documentary

Tarantino jumped the snark long ago, so I'll be giving this a miss, maybe see it on DVD but no interest in going to the flicks to see it.

Sorry, I cant support this mans hate.
Oh and the 1970's green color on that vest…..

Guess that is why I don't watch those TV shows. Never saw the sense of watching an actor promoting his own movie. Still waiting for an actor to come on a show and say 'Yeah I did it for the paycheck. I so phoned in the acting. Didn't even bother to learn the words. "

Now my other question is for all you people jumping on Foxx for his comments. Do you still go to Mel Gibson movies?

I agree with the majority of the posts. When you have the Hero in the movie say "I get to kill white people what is not to like." Tell me any other group, race, nationality on the planet that that could be said of in a movie that would not cause outrage over the racism shown by the "Hero" of the movie. Sickening.

" When you have the Hero in the movie say "I get to kill white people what is not to like."

But he didn't say that. He said he plays a SLAVE in the movie who gets free, and kills all the white people IN THE MOVIE. Which, being a Tarantino movie I'm sure he does, and presumably it's the slave owners. In the context of the rest of the monologue it isn't nearly as offensive as some seem to think. The horribly racist comments on Youtube made it look like a walk in the park…

And you guys know that the writers on SNL write the monologues, right? It wasn't funny or even in good taste, but it wasn't some racist "kill all da white folks" diatribe as many of you are trying to claim. Plus it's SNL-- there's rarely ANYTHING good on there any more! 8)=

He could've said no to the SNL directors, and writers, but he went along with it.

If another person of a different skin color had said that about another race, the national media would be clamoring for their heads, but Foxx gets a pass.

It's just wrong, and wasn't funny at all.

Nervous Nellies? More like the typical "Grumpy Old Men of TMP".

There is not a minority classification out there that doesn't have the same liberties to say what they want in the name of humor. Jewish comedians, female comedians, Asian comedians, etc. It's just about trying to make people laugh. But the point is, when you "own" something, you get liberties that outsiders don't get.

Remember way back in the day when you were in high school? You probably sat around complaining about how your school sucked. But then on a Friday night when someone from another school would say your school sucked, you were ready to fight them. It's the SAME EXACT THING.

Also consider, this was SNL. They often uses slightly uncomfortable situations to make people laugh.

As for shirt color being a consideration for judging the quality of a movie? Wow. Talk about no sense of perspective.

"I get to kill white people what is not to like."

That's one of the lines from one of the trailers.

"But the point is, when you "own" something, you get liberties that outsiders don't get".

I've heard and read this a number of times.

I call B. S. on the theory.

If it is wrong when one group says it, and there would be a huge outcry over it, it's wrong when others do as well.

You are welcome to that opinion Mako but most of society says you are wrong.

The high school story holds true for almost every one I know. Can you dispute that sort of thing is true in your experience? It's just human nature. It has ZERO to do with race or any other controversial classification. It can just as easily be seen in how we react when an outsider says anything about our group. Even when the outsider is saying the same exact thing we complain about within the group.

"Most of society says you are wrong"

When does this make somthing right? Let's go back to say 1890, most of society would have accepted social darwinism and the idea of superior and inferior races. Oh, I guess that makes it okay then, most of society thinks it is right.
No, that argument does not hold water for me.

I don't know about the high school thing. I don't know that I ever bitched that my particular high school sucked, just that school sucked in general. I think, even in high school, that I had a pretty fair view of where my school fell in academic, social and athletic terms.

I would certainly not have been willing to fight someone over them saying my high school sucked. I may have disagreed with them over a particular point.

Same with college, I went to Penn State. I never have had nor do I now have any particular interest in Penn State. I think their football program should be abolished for a time because of what happened and have actually argued against an Ohio State fan because he thought the punishment was too harsh. Imagine that.

That being said the line:

"I get to kill white people what is not to like."

does not offend me in the least. I can certainly imagine a black slave saying something like this in 1853. I can even imagine him being completely justified in feeling this way.

Certainly if a Jewish character in 1944 was being recruited for something or other and he said "I get to kill German people, what is not to like" no one would have a problem with it.

Also the last line in the SNL dialog doesn't seem to be attacking white people so much as making fun of black people. I don't think it is to be taken seriously. It is SNL, after all.

Lighten the hell up! Its not even opened yet and many of you are protesting from your soapbox!

If you're not a dyed in the wool Catholic, you're definitly in the hunt. With all of your self-righteousness aside please remember its Hollywood, if you are looking for historical accuracy then please move uptown into the films that few agree upon and then complain their. I'm sure your mother will find it interesting that you made it out of the basement.

"Most of society says you are wrong"

When does this make something right?

He's not saying that it's morally right or wrong, he's saying that Mako11 is wrong when he says the theory is BS.

Just about every marginalized group in US history has at one time or another adopted a pejorative term as a badge of honor – within their own circle. But if you're not a member of that circle, use the term in their presence at your own peril. Especially if alcohol is being served.

By the way, saw it today, thought it was great. Never dragged, held my interest the whole way through.

Thanks for share my friend.

Amicalement
Armand

"Wearing clothing that is 30 years into the future…(and a nice 1970's green color on that vest), and carrying a pistol that hasn't been invented"

OK, it's a 'Django' film… probably not best place to seek accuracy/realism etc

The movie has more to do with spaghetti westerns and blaxploitation flicks than accurate history. Nitpicking details like uninvented guns and green vests is like criticizing Star Wars because the spaceships go whoosh when there's no atmosphere.
Anyway. Saw it, liked it. Wasn't Pulp Fiction / Kill Bill great, but still the best thing I've seen in the theater for a while.

Slavery and bigotry are wrong. Period. But I wonder if Hollywood does anybody any favors by producing movies that are not really history but an exageration of sterotypes that are done to glorify one side (wise noble scarificial) and totally vilify the other (evil personified). Long ago Morgan Freeman wisely said "the way to solve racism is to stop talking about it." Movies like this do more than talk. they make it very graphic and inflamitory. Hollywood is not in the business of educating America to its own history. It is in the business to get a strong reaction for the purpose of making money. That end ALWAYS jusifies their means.
I have talked to many folks over the years, including wargamers that should know better, who get their "facts" and therefore their opinions from film and not research and study. I too, will skip this one.
sky

Does he fire a Gatling from the hip?