Django Unchained movie thread! (open spoilers)

[Larry_Borgia]

I can’t see Django the gunfighter as being all that realistic. The Gun battles at the end were straight up John Woo. Although the six shooters did run out occasionally,no way was it after 6 shots. ( I admit I wasn’t counting). Also, touches like the Mandingo fighting, the convoluted (and prob ably unnecessary) plot to get back Broomhilda, and a lot of little things made this seem like a QT movie to me.

It was awesome though, and good to see a return to form after Inglorious Basterds, which was a bit of a disappointment, IMO. Samuel Jackson was amazing, I didn’t even recognize him at first. Great to see him out of his comfort zone, reminding people that he’s a talented versatile actor, not just Samuel Mothafuckin’ Jackson.

Also, I don’t see Schulz losing his cool as being all that unrealistic, as some have said. He was already losing it. We see him, after lecturing Django on not breaking character, break it himself when he saw Candie’s treatment of D’Artagnan. Django has to pull him in. He just reached the point where he couldn’t let Candie live, let alone shake his hand.

Also, someone else mentioned upthread that they couldn’t see why it was so hard for Broomhilda to put on her act around Candie and the others, not letting on that she new Django at all. But she did manage to fool everyone but Stephen, who was probably very attuned to the emotions of the slaves he oversaw. It was probably in a lot of the things she didn’t do, the way she might studiously have avoided looking at Django, that roused his suspicion. Being right at the boundary between slave and master, Charles would have phenomenal people reading skills, better than those of a master poker player.

you do have to swallow the whole scheme to buy back Broomhilda. Schultz could have simply said he heard a rumor that one of the slaves on Candie’s ranch spoke German, abnd offered to buy her for a ridiculous price. If Django hadn’t accompanied him, I’m sure Candie wouldn’t have had a problem with it. But there we are.

My only real complaint was Tarantino’s acting. Jeez, that was awful. Also, more Zoe Bell and Walton Goggins, please.

[pancakes3]

@Ellen_Cherry

This I heard from his own lips on NPR as he was forced repeatedly to “defend” making a “serious movie about slavery” and “justify” his use of “nigger” throughout. His interviewer was a very humorless black woman — she said this aloud during the interview. (Well she said she was African American; she didn’t comment on her humorlessness.)

Was this the same interview that had the interviewer ask Samuel L Jackson about the gratuitous use of the n-word to which Jackson flippantly retorted (paraphrased) “What n-word? You’ll have to say it in order for me to respond to it.” The interviewer refused to say it and the issue was more or less glossed over. Glossed is probably the wrong word here.

[DiosaBellissima]

@Larry_Borgia

My only real complaint was Tarantino’s acting. Jeez, that was awful.

I spent a solid 5 minutes trying to figure out what the hell his accent was supposed to be before I figured out he was Australian.

[drastic_quench]

@pancakes3

Was this the same interview that had the interviewer ask Samuel L Jackson about the gratuitous use of the n-word to which Jackson flippantly retorted (paraphrased) “What n-word? You’ll have to say it in order for me to respond to it.” The interviewer refused to say it and the issue was more or less glossed over. Glossed is probably the wrong word here.

That’s awesome. Good on Jackson. “N-word” lends the term incredible power. It’s akin to the Harry Potter characters refusing to say the villain’s name. If journalists would toughen up and not live in fear of complaints, there could actually be a dialogue about “nigger.”

[AClockworkMelon]

@Larry_Borgia

Also, I don’t see Schulz losing his cool as being all that unrealistic, as some have said. He was already losing it. We see him, after lecturing Django on not breaking character, break it himself when he saw Candie’s treatment of D’Artagnan. Django has to pull him in. He just reached the point where he couldn’t let Candie live, let alone shake his hand.

Agreed. He was also urging Django to take it easy on “those poor souls” on the ride to the plantation.

@Larry Borgia

Also, someone else mentioned upthread that they couldn’t see why it was so hard for Broomhilda to put on her act around Candie and the others, not letting on that she new Django at all. But she did manage to fool everyone but Stephen, who was probably very attuned to the emotions of the slaves he oversaw. It was probably in a lot of the things she didn’t do, the way she might studiously have avoided looking at Django, that roused his suspicion. Being right at the boundary between slave and master, Charles would have phenomenal people reading skills, better than those of a master poker player.

Some people just aren’t good liars. She’s been a slave all her life and has suffered perhaps the worst treatment of all with Candie and now she’s suddenly learned that she’s about to be freed. She fainted when she saw Django. She just isn’t a woman who can contain her emotions very easily, I suppose. Also remember that it was Candie’s sister who first noticed and pointed out that she had “eyes for Django.” That’s what alerted Stephen.

@Larry Borgia

You do have to swallow the whole scheme to buy back Broomhilda. Schultz could have simply said he heard a rumor that one of the slaves on Candie’s ranch spoke German, abnd offered to buy her for a ridiculous price.

We can say that in hindsight because in the end he was forced to pay the $12k for her but remember that he wasn’t planning on actually buying Eskimo Joe. He wanted to get her without having to spend too much of his own money.

[The_Other_Waldo_Pepper]

@drastic_quench

That’s awesome. Good on Jackson. “N-word” lends the term incredible power. It’s akin to the Harry Potter characters refusing to say the villain’s name. If journalists would toughen up and not live in fear of complaints, there could actually be a dialogue about “nigger.”

I’m now wondering whether Tarantino ever considered putting it right in the title.

[chinchalinchin]

@Ellen_Cherry

I’m not disagreeing with the previous two posts at all, but to add information (and a little opinion) — Tarantino wasn’t making a “serious movie about slavery,” he made an action movie. This I heard from his own lips on NPR as he was forced repeatedly to “defend” making a “serious movie about slavery” and “justify” his use of “nigger” throughout. His interviewer was a very humorless black woman — she said this aloud during the interview. (Well she said she was African American; she didn’t comment on her humorlessness.)

Anyway, my point is that QT says that antebellum slavery was the backdrop and setting for his action movie, not the subject. It uses the elements from that time period to construct a fantastically involving movie. Because it’s a period piece, we look for historical authenticity and because it’s about such a painful part of our past, we look for clues which teach us about our attitudes in the present.

Oh, I didn’t mean it was authentic. I think that’s pretty obvious; it is a Tarantino movie after all. His movies, as I said, aren’t known for their realism. I do disagree though that the subject is not slavery. Of course it is. Tarantino deconstructed the whole revenge western trope that usually involves a white man getting revenge on the bandits/gunslingers/marshals who killed his wife/children/friend. Instead of using a white man, though, he used a slave. And who deserves revenge more than the black slave of the nineteenth century? It’s a ‘serious movie about slavery’ insofar that it takes the actual horrors of slavery as a catalyst for a classic action movie. It decouples from an authentic story the minute Django becomes a bounty hunter and jumps into traditional action story. It’s not meant to be a character study, obviously, but a fun romp through the South.

[you_with_the_face]

@DiosaBellissima

So, I’m the only one whose gaydar was going off a bit with Candie?

It didn’t really occur to me that Candie was gay, but now that you mention it, I can definitely see it.

One of his cronies–I think his name was Crash–definitely pinged my 'dar. He was the guy who was about to castrate Django.

[WordMan]

@you_with_the_face

It didn’t really occur to me that Candie was gay, but now that you mention it, I can definitely see it.

One of his cronies–I think his name was Crash–definitely pinged my 'dar. He was the guy who was about to castrate Django.

That’s Walt Goggins - used to be on the Shield and is now a wonderful bad guy on Justified.

I just assumed Candie was decadent - this was his domain and he treated everyone like he could buy 'em, sell 'em, fuck 'em or kill 'em and get some perverse pleasure out of it…guys, his sister, his slave women - whatever.

[outlierrn]

@chinchalinchin

I’ve enjoyed reading the discussion about Django that’s already been had in this thread. I’d like to raise another topic not directly related to the plot of the movie no one seems to have mentioned. Did anyone notice how ‘un-Tarantino’ this one felt? .

I wouldn’t have described it as Un-tarantino like, but I did describe it to a coworker as being the most linear movie he’s ever made.

[jsc1953]

Something I didn’t realize until just yesterday…whenever I heard the title (while the film was still in development) the only connection I could draw was to Django Reinhardt.

Imagine my surprise when I discovered that it’s an hommage to Django, starring Franco Nero. Never heard of it (and I was alive in 1966). Franco Nero was previously only known to me for playing Lancelot in the movie version of Camelot…but QT remembered him, and gave him a bit part in his movie (one of the people at the mandingo fight, who has a few words with Django).

Kind of like how Inglourious Basterds was a call back to this movie. QT’s film knowledge can only be described as “encyclopedic”. And non-discriminating.

[Larry_Borgia]

Awesome find, jsc1953!

[Nzinga_Seated]

@jsc1953

Something I didn’t realize until just yesterday…whenever I heard the title (while the film was still in development) the only connection I could draw was to Django Reinhardt.

Imagine my surprise when I discovered that it’s an hommage to Django, starring Franco Nero. Never heard of it (and I was alive in 1966). Franco Nero was previously only known to me for playing Lancelot in the movie version of Camelot…but QT remembered him, and gave him a bit part in his movie (one of the people at the mandingo fight, who has a few words with Django).

Kind of like how Inglourious Basterds was a call back to this movie. QT’s film knowledge can only be described as “encyclopedic”. And non-discriminating.

And Kill Bill was a call back to Thriller A Cruel Picture. Now, THAT film really knew how to shock!

[outlierrn]

There’s a documentary on spagetti westerns that talks about Django and the spin-offs.

OTOH, I think the buried alive scene in Kill Bill is a call back to Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Gacia

[Asimovian]

I have very little (and possibly nothing, depending on your perspective) to add to what has been a tremendous discussion in this thread. Nzinga and others have said essentially everything I could have hoped to say, and put it far better than I would have.

The only comments I want to make are with regard to Stephen’s character. First, with regard to his reaction to Candie being killed, I don’t think it was just about Stephen’s love for the boy he raised. One has to consider that even though Stephen was an old man, his status and stability were dependent on working under Candie. Candie’s death would mean a great deal of uncertainty for Stephen’s life. What if Candie’s sister were to re-marry? Who’s to say that Stephen would maintain his status under a new master? Stephen was clearly a very intelligent character, but Candie’s death meant the potential destruction of Stephen’s entire world.

Also, someone upthread mentioned that Candie’s sister changed her mind about neutering Django (the comment may have been a joke – I’ve read this thread over a few days, so forgive me for not tracking down the statement). I just wanted to point out that it seemed very clear to me that Stephen himself had changed her mind about how to handle Django. Stephen wanted Django completely and utterly broken.

[Elendil_s_Heir]

@WordMan

That’s Walt Goggins - used to be on the Shield and is now a wonderful bad guy on Justified…

He also plays a lame-duck Congressman from Ohio in Spielberg’s Lincoln. A small role that he does quite well in.

@jsc1953

…Franco Nero was previously only known to me for playing Lancelot in the movie version of Camelot…but QT remembered him, and gave him a bit part in his movie (one of the people at the mandingo fight, who has a few words with Django)…

Yes, he’s the guy who owned the losing fighter. At the bar, he asks if Django can spell his own name. Django does and notes, “The ‘D’ is silent,” to which Nero responds (of course!), “I know.”

My favorite bit of dialogue in the movie.

[jsc1953]

@Elendil_s_Heir

… Django does and notes, “The ‘D’ is silent,” to which Nero responds (of course!), “I know.”

My favorite bit of dialogue in the movie.

Which lead to one of my favorites: in the climactic shootout, just as he blows away one of Candie’s minions, it’s “the ‘D’ is silent…hillbilly”

[The_Other_Waldo_Pepper]

@Elendil_s_Heir

My favorite bit of dialogue in the movie.

“I count two guns…”

[Politzania]

I’ve really been enjoying this thread -thanks to all that have participated! Here’s a couple of random bits that have gone thru my mind about this film:

[ul]
[li]King Schultz - naming him Schwartz would have been too obvious? QT went with King, tho (MLK?) [/li]
[li]Stephen = reference to Stepin Fetchit? [/li]
[li]Schultz’s previous/cover procession as a dentist - eliminating rotted/diseased elements for the benefit of the whole[/li][/ul]

Also - when Stephen was telling Django the story of how he convinced Candie’s sister to send him to the mining colony instead - the repetition put me in mind of Bre’r Rabbit: “please don’t throw him in the briar patch!” - however, Stephen really was heartless after all.

[jsc1953]

@Politzania

Also - when Stephen was telling Django the story of how he convinced Candie’s sister to send him to the mining colony instead - the repetition put me in mind of Bre’r Rabbit: “please don’t throw him in the briar patch!” - however, Stephen really was heartless after all.

I thought exactly the same thing! And Stephen even looks like Uncle Remus.