"I like the way you die, boy." - A thread for Django Unchained

[Kim]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

So you as a white person don't want to dig to deep into this but you're okay with posting a lengthy blog post by a white person digging too deep into this? What?

Blog post which came to my attention by way of some black friends who felt it addressed some of their concerns about the film.

I don't feel equipped to discuss it in depth. I asked other people to consider whether or not they are before posting. This person felt equipped to discuss it in depth and made the post. Friends to whom these concerns are more relevant shared it with me. I in turn shared it with the forum. I don't feel any of these things are at odds with what I've said.

[Arcanum]

Sorry, I initially read this:

Originally Posted by Kim

I mention this only because I feel it may be wise for others to consider doing the same before starting into this discussion.

as you advocating non-discussion based solely on race. That was a misunderstanding on my part, my bad.

[Kim]

Another article about Django

What struck me most, sitting there in that theatre, was how Django Unchained was a white man’s slavery revenge fantasy, and one in which white people figure heavily and where black people are, largely, incidental. Django is allowed to regain his dignity because he is freed by a white man. He reunites with his wife, again, with the help of a white man. Django Unchained isn’t about a black man reclaiming his freedom. It’s about a white man working through his own racial demons and white guilt.

This paragraph was pointed out by others, and I think it's an important thing to take note of, regardless of how you feel about the rest of the review.

[Lumenskir]

I might be misreading that paragraph, but isn't that very reductive to how the mentor archetype works in fiction? I mean, without Obi Wan being there to mind wipe stormtroopers and barter with Han, Luke is literally stuck on Tatooine/dead when the stormtroopers find him. Without Morpheus dropping out of the blue to lift Neo out of the Matrix we don't have a movie.

I like the way this discussion framed it

It's also the first scene to establish Schultz's M.O. of exploiting his own whiteness to the fullest. He uses his race and refinement like a CIA asset whose swarthy complexion and command of Arabic lets him move freely through the Muslim and Arab world. The fact that Schultz's ruse ultimately serves to turn a slave into an avenging outlaw is fucking thrilling to my black eyes.

I don't think that just because Django needs Schultz's help means he's helpless without Schultz, no more than any duo or team with complementary skills is helpless when considered individually. And I don't think it's fair to say that his accomplishments are lessened because he had to get help from a white person.

[Azisien]

Well, y'see, I actually read all of the articles posted in this thread regarding the movie so far out of genuine interest. Well-written some of them were, but pretty much all reliant on shitty arguments.

The one point that came up that rang true among everything was Tarantino's hypocritical use of "history." He invokes "historical accuracy" to use the word nigger ten thousand times in the movie, but says the movie isn't supposed to be historical and there's lots of modern slang that make its way into the movie.

Of course, I still don't agree with this point, but it was the most illuminating. I could see how someone walked away with that notion, feeling rather uncomfortable. Most of the discomfort though, is probably still just from the pure shock value of the movie, which is pretty high. I think the authors delivering this point said they had to avert their eyes and plug their ears constantly. Definitely not Tarantino regulars.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Man there is still a lot of argument here- should I bite the bullet and go see it so I can provide the definitive proof of whether or not it is racist and how racist it is. I am the font of all wisdom after all, this is probably in my job description somewhere.

[Azisien]

You should. Be really drunk so your drunk vision can get to the bottom of this conundrum.

But most of the argument is based on articles posted by folks in the nethernet, I haven't even really seen much argument here specifically (as admitted, probably a few people have just censored their problems away - hmm, sounds familiar to some real world problems).

[Professor Smarmiarty]

I think the main problem is very few of us have seen the movie. LIke I have plnty to say on various points raised in this thread but its not totally clearcut so I feel I'd really have to see it first and I think others are the same way.
I am thinking of analysising it through Tarantino's other movies though- as he tends to make the same movie over and over again.

[Bells]

If you are interested, go see it. Form an opinion on it. If you are not interested, say "fuck it" and put your cash on stuff you are interested in. If you are not interested but want to have an opinion on a movie you didn't see or a book you didn't read cause "you don't have to see it to know it's shit" well than that would be just presumptuously stupid out of anybody walking on this living earth, wouldn't it?

It's not like a list of all movies you saw make some sort of personal record like a police record that can shape what jobs or promotions or opportunities you can get in this world... if the movie peeked your curiosity, go see it. If it sucks, tear it a new asshole to anyone within earshot that gives you the time to listen... If it's Ok, just rant about the absurd price of popcorn...

[Professor Smarmiarty]

I judge people by what movies they have seen.