# Django Unchained - Tarantino's "Southern"



## Crispy (Oct 11, 2012)

Cos it's a "Western" genre film, but set in the South, see? Starring Jamie Foxx as the eponymous slave, freed on the condition that he help hunt down a gang. Looks like a Tarantino movie, so if you like those, you'll probably like this 



Completely incongruous soundtrack in that trailer


----------



## Sweet FA (Oct 11, 2012)

That looks both terrible and excellent  

Yeah, soundtrack's odd. Though didn't he use Bowie or something in Inglorious Basterds? Can't remember if it worked or not.


----------



## zenie (Oct 11, 2012)

Love it


----------



## Reno (Oct 11, 2012)

Crispy said:


> Completely incongruous soundtrack in that trailer


 
It's a homage to 70s blaxploitation along the lines of Mandingo and The Legend of Nigger Charley and they often did feature funk and soul numbers.

I thought Inglorious Basterds was his best film yet, so I hope this continues the trend. Apparently this had lots of production problems.


----------



## zenie (Oct 11, 2012)

Mmmm I'd say most of Tarantino's stuff is homage to Blaxploitation, but the song near the end just seemed a bit too 'Hollywood'. The soundtracks to his films never fail to disappoint ime.


----------



## Crispy (Oct 11, 2012)

Yeah, it's a minor quibble and this does look like great fun


----------



## Sweet FA (Oct 11, 2012)

Reno said:


> I thought Inglorious Basterds was his best film


I prefer Reservoir Dogs but the opening scenes of IB with Christoph Waltz in the farmhouse are fantastic; beautifully shot, paced, measured and incredibly tense. I rate DiCaprio too so I hope this works.


----------



## RaverDrew (Oct 11, 2012)

DiCaprio is shit when he tries to do comedy, he's far better in serious roles imo.


----------



## Reno (Oct 11, 2012)

RaverDrew said:


> DiCaprio is shit when he tries to do comedy, he's far better in serious roles imo.


 
I think it's the other way round. He can be a charming and versatile performer and his best work so far was in the underrated comedy drama Catch Me If You Can where he got to display a great range of emotions and personas. Lately he has made his way through film after film with the same furrow browed expression, mistaking looking constipated for gravitas. His performances in Inception and Shutter Island were interchangeable.


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 11, 2012)

Sweet FA said:


> That looks both terrible and excellent
> 
> Yeah, soundtrack's odd. Though didn't he use Bowie or something in Inglorious Basterds? Can't remember if it worked or not.


As far as I know he only uses music from his own (home) collection for his movies, can't prove it though.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 11, 2012)

DexterTCN said:


> As far as I know he only uses music from his own (home) collection for his movies, can't prove it though.


 I saw an interview with John Carpenter in which he was fiercely critical of Tarantino's use of other soundtracks for Inglourious Basterds. I can see his point, though I did enjoy hearing the Cat People song during the climactic scene.


----------



## Reno (Oct 11, 2012)

Orang Utan said:


> I saw an interview with John Carpenter in which he was fiercely critical of Tarantino's use of other soundtracks for Inglourious Basterds. I can see his point, though I did enjoy hearing the Cat People song during the climactic scene.


 
I think Carpenter was just pissed off that he hasn't used one of his scores yet. 

On the whole I think Tarantino uses pre-existing scores and theme songs well. There was a good item in Radio 4's The Film Programme a couple of weeks ago where they pointed out how he is quite aware of how people make the right associations when they recognise his use of scores. Other directors can get it terribly wrong, like the use of the Vertigo score in The Artist, which was totally incongruous with themes and era of the film.


----------



## Voley (Oct 11, 2012)

Like the look of that.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 11, 2012)

Aye, I think it worked very well in the Kill Bill films.


----------



## gosub (Oct 11, 2012)

really liked the name Django,as in Django Rienhart or even DJango Django, would even consider it as a kids name, but now it'll be all wot after the Tarantino film?


----------



## Reno (Oct 11, 2012)

gosub said:


> really liked the name Django,as in Django Rienhart or even DJango Django, would even consider it as a kids name, but now it'll be all wot after the Tarantino film?


 
Django is also the title of a famous Spaghetti Western, which this references, rather than ruining the name of Django Reinhardt.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 11, 2012)

Django is the film that turns Jimmy Cliff into a badman in The Harder They Come IIRC


----------



## Reno (Oct 11, 2012)

...and Franco Nero, who played the original Django, has a role in this.


----------



## gosub (Oct 11, 2012)

Reno said:


> Django is also the title of a famous Spaghetti Western, which this references, rather than ruining the name of Django Reinhardt.


The problem is £100mil marketing spend the new film will have, not previous instances. My like for the name comes from my wife also being into Mr Reunhardt before we met


----------



## Reno (Oct 11, 2012)

Huh ?


----------



## ska invita (Oct 11, 2012)

Reno said:


> It's a homage to 70s blaxploitation along the lines of Mandingo and The Legend of Nigger Charley and they often did feature funk and soul numbers.





Reno said:


> Django is also the title of a famous Spaghetti Western, which this references, rather than ruining the name of Django Reinhardt.


From what I can see this is a Django movie, i.e. Spaghetti Western movie, mixed in with some blaxpolitation themes. The Django 'series' threw up over 30 odd Django movies (different directors, and little attempt to keep the Django chararcter much the same)..at least im hoping its done in a Spag Western style

Supposedly the black power themes in this have already pissed off some in the US, which is entertaining 


DexterTCN said:


> As far as I know he only uses music from his own (home) collection for his movies, can't prove it though.


may have been true once, but I heard an interview with a woman whose job it is to source music for his films ...nice job!

Genuinely looking forward to this - love django movies, tarantino is always worth a watch, pissing of racists in the US, what more can you ask for?


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Oct 12, 2012)

I'm looking forward to this. I liked Grindouse.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Oct 27, 2012)

looks ace to be fair he's continuing Inglorious Basterds form judging by the trailer


----------



## Firky (Oct 27, 2012)

I love how everyone becomes a strongly opinionated critic when it comes to QT films, throwing about lazy observations they have read in magazines and websites


----------



## Part 2 (Oct 27, 2012)

gosub said:


> The problem is £100mil marketing spend the new film will have, not previous instances. My like for the name comes from my wife also being into Mr Reunhardt before we met


 
I nearly called my boy Jimmy.

 film looks good


----------



## Structaural (Oct 29, 2012)

I watched Django (the 1966 italian western) recently after watching Rango (the Depp cartoon) with my kid. Had a great atmosphere. It was actually banned in England until 1993 and it contains an ear-cutting scene that must have inspired Tarantino.
Looking forward to this.
I like films that end in 'ango', except Fandango with Kevin Costner.


----------



## Reno (Dec 6, 2012)

Saw it tonight. I enjoyed, but it's not without problems. One is that the last third simply is as strong as what went before. The Austrian Christoph Waltz, who became an international star thanks to his supporting role in Inglorious Basterds, has one of the two lead roles here and he pretty much is the show. He gives the performance of the year and he is so funny and charismatic that almost everybody else pales around him. This includes Jamie Foxx who really is the central character which creates a problem later on when the focus shifts to him. Samuel L. Jackson (almost unrecognisable) traitorous character is the only one who comes close in matching Waltz and De Caprio is fine in a villainous role which makes a nice changing from all the serious frowning he's been doing in recent years. Kerry Washington is a good actress, but wasted in a nothing role as the damsel in distress, which is a shame considering Tarantino frequently features strong female characters.

It's still one of the best films in (a poor) year for film but I didn't enjoy this as much as Inglorious Basterds, to which this is a companion piece. Like Basterds this takes it's cues from (mostly Italian) exploitation cinema of the 70s rather than history and it is gleefully inauthentic. I'm sure there will be some controversy about it's representation of slavery, but I didn't have so much a problem with that than with Tarantino not managing to make many of his black characters as compelling as they should be.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 5, 2013)

Interesting article written by a professor of African American History: 
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blo...portrayal-of-slavery-in-django-unchained.html


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 5, 2013)

half way through it now, had to have a break due to a coughing fit. Its not bad at all but its certainly no IB.


Christopher Waltz is superb tho


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jan 5, 2013)

Reno said:


> I think Carpenter was just pissed off that he hasn't used one of his scores yet.
> 
> On the whole I think Tarantino uses pre-existing scores and theme songs well. There was a good item in Radio 4's The Film Programme a couple of weeks ago where they pointed out how he is quite aware of how people make the right associations when they recognise his use of scores. Other directors can get it terribly wrong, like the use of the Vertigo score in The Artist, which was totally incongruous with themes and era of the film.


 I think you're right!

Agree how good The Film Programme is in their serious discussion of film music. Neil Brand is always a joy to listen to as he deconstructs a piece of film music. I think his whole output on that programme should be compulsory listening in schools!


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 5, 2013)

gosub said:


> The problem is £100mil marketing spend the new film will have, not previous instances. My like for the name comes from my wife also being into Mr Reunhardt before we met


 
It's not starting any fires at the box office:

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=djangounchained.htm


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 5, 2013)

Reno said:


> Saw it tonight. I enjoyed, but it's not without problems. One is that the last third simply is as strong as what went before. The Austrian Christoph Waltz, who became an international star thanks to his supporting role in Inglorious Basterds, has one of the two lead roles here and he pretty much is the show. He gives the performance of the year and he is so funny and charismatic that almost everybody else pales around him. This includes Jamie Foxx who really is the central character which creates a problem later on when the focus shifts to him. Samuel L. Jackson (almost unrecognisable) traitorous character is the only one who comes close in matching Waltz and De Caprio is fine in a villainous role which makes a nice changing from all the serious frowning he's been doing in recent years. Kerry Washington is a good actress, but wasted in a nothing role as the damsel in distress, which is a shame considering Tarantino frequently features strong female characters..


 
I don't think it's a matter of performances, although I agree that Waltz gives a strong one. The other characters, most notably Django and Broomhilde, just aren't developed well enough in the script.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 5, 2013)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> looks ace to be fair he's continuing Inglorious Basterds form judging by the trailer


Inglorious Bastards is on the tv now, I wonder if I will make it all the way through this time.


----------



## Reno (Jan 5, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> It's not starting any fires at the box office:
> 
> http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=djangounchained.htm


 
Huh ? It made back its budget within a bit over a week and it's on the way to becoming Tarantino's most successful film.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 5, 2013)

Reno said:


> Huh ? It made back its budget within a bit over a week and it's on the way to becoming Tarantino's most successful film.


 
It's grossed 90 million in 11 days. That's no screaming hell.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 5, 2013)

It didn't do as well as Basterds in its opening weekend.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=inglouriousbasterds.htm


----------



## maomao (Jan 5, 2013)

The original Django is one of the best westerns ever made. Best watched when you don't know the plot or what's in the coffin. There were several dozen films with 'Django' in the title made after it (only one official sequel many years later as far as I know) and I think QT is referencing the ubiquitousness of the name in spaghetti westerns generally rather than the original Django specifically.


----------



## Reno (Jan 5, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> It's grossed 90 million in 11 days. That's no screaming hell.


 
Which means it's far from done and over. By the time it's been released for a few weeks and overseas it will have raked in 300 to 400 million. Trade papers and the news have been full of how the film is a huge success. 

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/django-unchained-beats-hobbit-no-408110

http://news.yahoo.com/django-unchained-pace-tarantinos-biggest-box-office-film-033102344.html


----------



## Reno (Jan 5, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> It didn't do as well as Basterds in its opening weekend.
> 
> http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=inglouriousbasterds.htm


 
That's not the opening weekend, 120 million is what it made for its entire theatrical run in the US. With overseas earnings it made over 320 million and Django is likely to make more than that. 

Basterds made 73 million in the same amount of time Django made 93 million. (yes, it helps being able to navigate your way around the site and interpret the numbers  )


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jan 5, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> Interesting article written by a professor of African American History:
> http://www.newyorker.com/online/blo...portrayal-of-slavery-in-django-unchained.html


That is indeed a good article.


> On the hundred-and-fiftieth anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation, it’s worth recalling that slavery was made unsustainable largely through the efforts of those who were enslaved. The record is replete with enslaved blacks—even so-called house slaves—who poisoned slaveholders, destroyed crops, “accidentally” burned down buildings, and ran away in such large numbers their lost labor crippled the Confederate economy. The primary sin of “Django Unchained” is not the desire to create an alternative history. It’s in the idea that an enslaved black man willing to kill in order to protect those he loves could constitute one.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 5, 2013)

Reno said:


> (yes, it helps being able to navigate your way around the site and interpret the numbers  )


 
It certainly does, doesn't it? 


*Inglourious Basterds*
Domestic Summary
Opening Weekend: $38,054,676
(#1 rank, 3,165 theaters, $12,024 average)


*Django Unchained*

Domestic Summary
Opening Weekend: $30,122,888
(#2 rank, 3,010 theaters, $10,008 average)


----------



## ReturnOfElfman (Jan 5, 2013)

I hope this is better than that shit Inglorious Bastards. Worst Tartantino film by a mile.


----------



## Reno (Jan 6, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> It certainly does, doesn't it?
> 
> 
> *Inglourious Basterds*
> ...


 
So, because Django has made less money in two days but then it made more money than Basterds in two weeks, that indicates that its less successful and a box office flop ?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 6, 2013)

sleaterkinney said:


> Inglorious Bastards is on the tv now, I wonder if I will make it all the way through this time.


It has good bits but is too long.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 6, 2013)

ok , just finished it ( its a long film.. )

the mash up at Candyland was awesome.

Samuel l Jacksons performance is excellent ( although the character is horrible )

But theres something about the whole film I cant quite get, its almost souless ( sp ? )


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 6, 2013)

Reno said:


> So, because Django has made less money in two days but then it made more money than Basterds in two weeks, that indicates that its less successful and a box office flop ?


I made a simple declaration: that Basterds made more money in its opening weekend. That's just the truth. I said nothing further than that.


----------



## ymu (Jan 6, 2013)

That's not what you said though, is it?



Johnny Canuck3 said:


> It's not starting any fires at the box office:
> 
> http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=djangounchained.htm


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 6, 2013)

The post under discussion is #36


----------



## ymu (Jan 6, 2013)

The only apparent function of #36 is to back up the more general claim in #31.

If you find it so hard to admit having been mistaken, you can just quietly back away instead of carrying on digging, you know?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 6, 2013)

ymu said:


> The only apparent function of #36 is to back up the more general claim in #31.
> 
> If you find it so hard to admit having been mistaken, you can just quietly back away instead of carrying on digging, you know?


 
Uh... they're my posts? Which means, I know what I meant by them, better than you. 

And no, 36 was a standalone observation. Which was true.

p.s. Why are you getting yourself involved in this? If you're looking to pick a fight with someone, find someone else.


----------



## ymu (Jan 6, 2013)

If that nerve is so touchy, you really shouldn't expose it so often.

Just a thought.


----------



## Firky (Jan 6, 2013)

Watched this last night and it is fantastic, probably the only QT film I have really liked since he made Pulp Fiction.

Already I am saying it's probably the best film I will see in 2013 if not one of the best.

Being a slave has never been so cool.

9.5/10


----------



## sim667 (Jan 7, 2013)

Is it out then?

Im gonna go t'cinema if it is.


----------



## Idaho (Jan 7, 2013)

I think this film would annoy me, so I won't bother. QT makes pacy, entertaining films with good soundtracks. Scratch below that layer and you are back to daylight.


----------



## Dan U (Jan 7, 2013)

sim667 said:


> Is it out then?
> 
> Im gonna go t'cinema if it is.


 
couple of weeks I think, 18th according to IMDB.

i watched it with the Mrs on Saturday, I have to say we both really enjoyed it. I agree with what @Reno said re: the last third <YEP SORRY OT> but part of that I think is because the film is a tad overlong at nearly 3 hours. Best film i've seen in a while though.

PS. don't google Mandingo in google images with safesearch off.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 7, 2013)

Oi spoiler dan! Lots of people spoiling on this thread recently.


----------



## Dan U (Jan 7, 2013)

fuck yeah massive sorry. have edited.

twat


----------



## Left (Jan 7, 2013)

Tarantino is a cock and his films are shit
I don't see how this one will be any different


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 7, 2013)

How old are you Left?


----------



## sim667 (Jan 7, 2013)

Left said:


> Tarantino is a cock and his films are shit
> I don't see how this one will be any different



Well I'm glad that piece of valuable and well researched information has made it onto this thread. I definately won't be going to see it now


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 7, 2013)

Idaho said:


> entertaining films with good soundtracks.


 
Many great Spaghetti Westerns were just this, so it's a good genre for QT to work with.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 7, 2013)

What sort of _bastard_ would make entertaining films with good soundtracks?


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 7, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> What sort of _bastard_ would make entertaining films with good soundtracks?


 
That Scorcese's a proper cunt!


----------



## Left (Jan 7, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> How old are you Left?


 
23. Not that it matters.


----------



## Idaho (Jan 7, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> What sort of _bastard_ would make entertaining films with good soundtracks?


You'd never catch Peter Greenaway making such elementary mistakes.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 7, 2013)

Idaho said:


> You'd never catch Peter Greenaway making such elementary mistakes.


 
He's got the good soundtracks!


----------



## ymu (Jan 8, 2013)

Just saw it. Wow.

Much more _Kill Bill_ than _Inglourious Basterds_. It's pretty much the same plot as _Kill Bill_ (both volumes), but very differently paced.

Make sure your bladder is empty if you see it in the cinema. Or take a bottle to piss in. And save some refreshment for the end, it's quite a marathon and you (probably) won't want to miss anything.



Spoiler: for the purists but not much of a spoiler



I disagree with those who found the last third slow. It did feel like it was going to be like that, because we'd had what felt like it was going to be a film ending at over two hours in, but it wasn't a very lengthy last third at all. And there needed to be the plot equivalent of being buried alive, obv. 

The article OU posted is right about the troubling aspects. Much the same mythology (of not fighting oppression) surrounds the Jewish resistance to the Nazis, but I don't remember anything in Inglourious Basterds that indulged that mythology - quite the opposite. I'm not sure he's right about the film needing to riff off the mythological history to resonate as a revenge fantasy, although it certainly makes the job easier. There was a lot there about class as well as race, which may be why the 'house-slaves' were depicted as they were; some of it was bordering on "swimming pools at Auschwitz".

In that context, my partner makes an interesting point about the casting of Samuel L Jackson. Which is that no other black actor could have pulled it off. Jackson has an impeccable track record playing black bad-asses, so he (and Tarantino) got away with it.

Also in that context, the female protagonist in _Kill Bill _only had a male mentor in fairly brief flashback; Django had a white mentor nearly all the way through, although the power dynamic changes some time before the mentor is disposed of. It's a slave revenge fantasy that still ultimately credits an honourable white man, without whom none of it would have been possible. Very resonant with 'white' histories of slavery; it's certainly not gonna change Spike Lee's view of Tarantino.

So yes, troubling in many ways. But we're not ready to write Tarantino off as a racist yet. He should quit the fucking cameos though.


----------



## snadge (Jan 8, 2013)

Loved the part with the Monty Pythonesque KKK guys, film was good but a lot of people are seemingly too gushing about it, there were far better films released in 2012.


----------



## ymu (Jan 8, 2013)




----------



## Firky (Jan 8, 2013)

Left said:


> Tarantino is a cock and his films are shit
> I don't see how this one will be any different


 
Oh go and fucking shave your bum fluff off you adolescent prick.


----------



## Left (Jan 8, 2013)

I shave every day
I'd say Tarantino's films appeal to an adolescent mentality


----------



## Firky (Jan 8, 2013)

No, what does appeal to the adolescent mentality is "everything mainstream is shit" and "I am a nihilist". Which you so frequently revel in. It's excruciatingly immature - you try too hard.

Also trying to act superior and mature is another adolescent trait.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 8, 2013)

Left said:
			
		

> I shave every day
> I'd say Tarantino's films appeal to an adolescent mentality



That's a bad thing why?


----------



## Firky (Jan 8, 2013)

"Kill all humans", ffs. Kind of thing kids scrawled on their army surplus backpack next to NIRVANA painted in on tippex.


----------



## Balbi (Jan 8, 2013)

Tarantino's films are best if you don't spend too much time thinking about them afterwards. But they're great for that big jolt of entertainment, swearyness and dialogue.

You know what you're going to get with him, which is nice.


----------



## Left (Jan 8, 2013)

firky said:


> No, what does appeal to the adolescent mentality is "everything mainstream is shit" and "I am a nihilist". Which you so frequently revel in. It's excruciatingly immature - you try too hard.
> 
> Also trying to act superior and mature is another adolescent trait.


 
Aren't you the person who not too long ago was making endless threads about rimming and handjobs? And now you're Mr Maturity.
What do you have against nihilism anyway? Do you genuinely believe the universe has a purpose? If not, you're a nihilist. How does it feel?



butchersapron said:


> That's a bad thing why?


 
It contributes to the infantilisation of our culture.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 8, 2013)

Left said:


> It contributes to the infantilisation of our culture.


That's a very conservative and reactionary view frankly. Our? Culture? Our culture? Infantilisation? Expand on these terms please.


----------



## Reno (Jan 8, 2013)

Left said:


> Do you genuinely believe the universe has a purpose? If not, you're a nihilist. How does it feel?.


 
I don't know whether the universe has a purpose. However I believe that we as human beings should make an effort that our lives have a purpose. Being a nihilist is the lazy persons approach to life. It's something one should move past asap when one leaves adolesence, when that may look like a 'cool' stance, but it's really just self-indulgence and self-pity.


----------



## Left (Jan 8, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> That's a very conservative and reactionary view of culture frankly. Our? Culture? Our culture? Infantilisation? Expand on these terms please.


 

It was an off the cuff remark not a serious philosophical argument. But I mean that the model of "coolness" presented in Tarantino's films is itself deeply regressive and reactionary. But mostly I just hate the man.


----------



## Left (Jan 8, 2013)

Reno said:


> I don't know whether the universe has a purpose. However I believe that we as human beings should make an effort that our lives have a purpose. Being a nihilist is the lazy persons approach to life. It's something one should move past asap when one leaves adolesence, when that may look like a 'cool' stance.


 
I don't think being a nihilist is cool, I think it's sensible. There's nothing in the definition of nihilism that prevents you from giving your own life a purpose. Many people don't realise they're nihilists.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 8, 2013)

Left said:
			
		

> It was an off the cuff remark not a serious philosophical argument. But I mean that the model of "coolness" presented in Tarantino's films is itself deeply regressive and reactionary. But mostly I just hate the man.


 
His models of coolness are a part of a dialogue with the historical construction of coolness and so inherently critical. I think you may have missed a fair few things about what he's actually up to.


----------



## Left (Jan 8, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> His models of coolness are a part of. a dialogue with the historical construction of coolness and so inherently critical. I think you may have missed a fair few things about what he's actually up to.


 
So it's like how Stieg Larsson revels in graphically portraying sexual violence to show how wrong it is.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 8, 2013)

Left said:


> So it's like how Stieg Larsson revels in graphically portraying sexual violence to show how wrong it is.


Nope, not at all. It's more like exposing the frameworks on which these things occur. Seriously, if you're going to be a conservative cultural critic you have to work a bit harder than _everyone else is shit._


----------



## Left (Jan 8, 2013)

OK, I'll bail out. I know nothing about this film and don't intend to see it.


----------



## sim667 (Jan 8, 2013)

firky said:


> "Kill all humans", ffs. Kind of thing kids scrawled on their army surplus backpack next to NIRVANA painted in on tippex.


 
And the words from "Ifwhiteamericatoldthetruthforonedayit'sworldwouldfallapart"

[/Guilty]


I infact still have my teenage grunge graffitti bag, well one of them anyway, I think I was in a more of a fear factory stage than a nirvana stage then tbh.


----------



## Firky (Jan 8, 2013)

Left said:


> Aren't you the person who not too long ago was making endless threads about rimming and handjobs? And now you're Mr Maturity.


 
No, sorry to disappoint. I didn't post for four years and only returned a few months agp when I was incapacitated. But even if I did start those kind of threads at least they're celebrating the many joys of life and not dismissing everything as shit and beneath me.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 8, 2013)

Left said:


> I don't think being a nihilist is cool, I think it's sensible.


----------



## nastybobby (Jan 8, 2013)

I enjoyed it. Blazing Saddles with lots and lots of gore!


----------



## ReturnOfElfman (Jan 9, 2013)

Just saw it. Brilliant. One of his best films and so much better than IB (thankfully). I had to watch it in 2 parts but only because I had the bairn to help look after. Otherwise I would of easily watched it in one go I think.

Not sure how accurate everything is, in the sense of the relationships between the 'whites' and 'blacks' though. I'm not sure I buy into the criticism of it being part of the 'white' historical point of view as I think it does present some pretty powerful and strong black characters in it, but probably aren't the most knowledgable person the subject.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 9, 2013)

I'd agree that it surpassed IB, and easily my favourite soundtrack since Jackie Brown.

I also enjoyed how the blood was very 70s and copious


----------



## Reno (Jan 9, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> I'd agree that it surpassed IB, and easily my favourite soundtrack since Jackie Brown.
> 
> I also enjoyed how the blood was very 70s and copious


I liked Django, but I didn't think it came anywhere near Inglorious Basterds, which together with Jackie Brown is his best film IMO.

I think in part of it has to do with being German and I was amazed how astute and knowledgeable Tarantino was about obscure German cinema of the period. And I have seen so much reverent and self-important cinematic Vergangenheitsbewaeltigung that I found the way he played fast and lose with history in IB a well deserved kick in the teeth to high minded Oscar bait post-Holocaust twaddle like The Reader or Sophies Choice (which I found far more exploitative and dishonest than IB).

But I also preferred its less conventional episodic structure, the large ensemble cast, having a strong central female protagonist in Shashanna Dreyfuss (Kerry Washington's character was nothing more than a retrograde damsel in distress) and the cheeky audacity of the end which far outdid Django. And Djange was also him reflecting a historical tragedy through the prism of 70s Italian exploitation cinema for the second time. And Christoph Walz so owns Django Unchained, that when the focus shifts to the far less interesting Jamie Foxx in the last half hour, I didn't feel invested in the film or its endless bloodbath anymore.


----------



## Reno (Jan 9, 2013)

As to Jamie Foxx, who gave the least memorable performance of the four male leads, Tarantino originally wrote the character of Django for Will Smith, who unfortunately got cold feet. It's would have been a subversion of a film star persona along the lines of John Travolta's in Pulp Fiction, only ten times so as Smith is a much biggers star than travolta was then. Will Smith is the most vanilla and least edgy of all black male film stars, reassuring to even the most conservative white audiences and the point would have been to make him threatening and angry. After decades of unchallenging roles in bland blockbusters it easy to forget that he can be a good dramatic actor, as his early role as an enigmatic gay hustler in Six Degrees of Seperation showed.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 9, 2013)

loads of practise acting on the neverending 'Fresh Prince of Bel Air' which did have serious moments amongst the laughs


----------



## Balbi (Jan 9, 2013)

If Will Smith had got it, the Samuel L Jackson role would have had to go to Uncle Phil.


----------



## The Octagon (Jan 10, 2013)

Balbi said:


> If Will Smith had got it, the Samuel L Jackson role would have had to go to Uncle Phil.


 
And Django could have an unwelcome buddy with him that gets ejected from the house violently, but everybody laughs it off.


----------



## Balbi (Jan 10, 2013)

The Octagon said:


> And Django could have an unwelcome buddy with him that gets ejected from the house violently, but everybody laughs it off.



And they could both sing the theme.

Oh Quentin, you didn't think it through


----------



## Reno (Jan 10, 2013)

Balbi said:


> And they could both sing the theme.
> 
> Oh Quentin, you didn't think it through


 
He did, but Will Smith turned him down.


----------



## Balbi (Jan 10, 2013)

Reno said:


> He did, but Will Smith turned him down.



The internet: where proposing and laughing at absurd results of things already covered in the thread get treated seriously


----------



## Reno (Jan 10, 2013)

Balbi said:


> The internet: where proposing and laughing at absurd results of things already covered in the thread get treated seriously


 
It's the teutonic approach to the Internet. Deal with it !


----------



## Balbi (Jan 10, 2013)

Ich Bin Ein Buzzkill


----------



## Reno (Jan 10, 2013)

Balbi said:


> Ich Bin Ein Buzzkill


 
Buzzkill = Spielverderber


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jan 10, 2013)

I noticed that Spike Lee had some objections to the movie, but from what I've heard from people who've seen it, its a big FU to the south.



> Some use Twitter to share points of interest. Some want to chat with friends. Others, however, just want to spout ill-researched mind-guffs and goad Quentin Tarantino, and, last week, Spike Lee had this to say via his account: "American slavery was not a Sergio Leone Spaghetti Western. It was a holocaust. My ancestors are slaves. Stolen from Africa. I will honor them."
> 
> ....
> 
> Spike Lee is no stranger to getting all up in Quentin Tarantino's business. He's berated Tarantino before for his use of the word 'nigger' in _Jackie Brown_, asking the question "What does he want to be made - an honorary black man?" as though skin colour is some kind of gentleman's club. When _Jackie Brown_ star Samuel L. Jackson defended Tarantino, Lee called Jackson "a house Negro", Negro being an insulting word you can't say, but one which Spike Lee can, presumably because he's Spike Lee and you aren't. With Tarantino returning with a slavery-themed homage to blaxploitation movies, it was only a matter of time before Lee emerged from his lair to pitch in with an opinion no-one asked for. Tarantino has already offered a perceptive, fair statement in response, but who cares, hardly anyone's talking about that.


 
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/pla...o-unchained-hypocritical-views_b_2425449.html

I think I'll reserve judgement for when I see it this weekend.


----------



## Reno (Jan 10, 2013)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> I noticed that Spike Lee had some objections to the movie, but from what I've heard from people who've seen it, its a big FU to the south.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

The article also points out that Lee hasn't even seen the film and that he is a hypocrite.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jan 10, 2013)

Reno said:


> The article also points out that Lee hasn't even seen the film and that he is a hypocrite.


 
Yeah, I saw that too. He's always struck me as a bit of an attention whore. (Shocking to find that in Hollywood!) I can't see how you can have a rational opinion about something if you've never experienced it. At least see the movie first.


----------



## hiccup (Jan 10, 2013)

Long interview with Tarantino, in which this film is discussed at some length:


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 10, 2013)

I think it's fair to criticise Tarantino for taking an adolescent delight in being granted the license to use the word nigger lots in his films (his character in Pulp Fiction says it a lot and he obviously gets a kick out of saying it), but I think Lee does himself no favours for criticising the new film without seeing it.


----------



## D'wards (Jan 10, 2013)

I thought it was a very good film, but i feel QT has been a victim of his own success, in that i'm sure he can do basically what he wants in his films now. This and Basterds were too long, and the scenes were too long. Trimmed up a bit they would both be excellent films.

For example, the scene in which QT is in himself was entirely pointless


----------



## rekil (Jan 10, 2013)

He had a tantrum during a C4 news interview with Krishnan Guru Murty. "I'm shutting your butt down."


----------



## D'wards (Jan 10, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> I think it's fair to criticise Tarantino for taking an adolescent delight in being granted the license to use the word nigger lots in his films


 
I think its fair do's in stuff like Pulp Fiction, but in a story about slavery it would seem pretty weird if it was not used at all.

Spike Lee shout take Clint Eastwood's advice and "Shut his face". He seems to be a self appointed arbitrator of race issues in films these days.


----------



## Reno (Jan 10, 2013)

D'wards said:


> I thought it was a very good film, but i feel QT has been a victim of his own success, in that i'm sure he can do basically what he wants in his films now. This and Basterds were too long, and the scenes were too long. Trimmed up a bit they would both be excellent films.
> 
> For example, the scene in which QT is in himself was entirely pointless


 
I think apart from maybe his first two, all of his films are too long, but the only one that I found genuinely boring was Kill Bill 2. And he really should stop casting himself, as always he was distractingly awful in Django.


----------



## D'wards (Jan 10, 2013)

BTW - QT is only making 3 more films, retiring at 60. Wants to stop before the quality declines he said.


----------



## Reno (Jan 10, 2013)

D'wards said:


> BTW - QT is only making 3 more films, retiring at 60. Wants to stop before the quality declines he said.


 
Steven Soderbergh recently said the same. Must be something in the water in Hollywood. I still remember Stephen King announcing he would only write another three books about twenty books ago.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 10, 2013)

Reno said:


> I think apart from maybe his first two, all of his films are too long, but the only one that I found genuinely boring was Kill Bill 2. And he really should stop casting himself, as always he was distractingly awful in Django.


I like his Top Gun rant in that film that otherwise is so unmemorable that its name escapes me.
And he tells a good joke in Desperado


----------



## ymu (Jan 10, 2013)

D'wards said:


> For example, the scene in which QT is in himself was entirely pointless




How do you make that out then?


----------



## ymu (Jan 10, 2013)

hiccup said:


> Long interview with Tarantino, in which this film is discussed at some length:



Interesting. That answers some of the my questions. He doesn't see Django as an alternative history in the way that Inglourious Basterds was, and he "didn't need" to do any research because he already knew a lot about the pre-civil war period. He seems to think it's historically accurate wrt slavery.


----------



## Supine (Jan 10, 2013)

Tarantino interviewed on C4 news tonight. OMG what a dicksplash! I'm sure it'll be up on youtube soon.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 10, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> That's a very conservative and reactionary view frankly. Our? Culture? Our culture? Infantilisation? Expand on these terms please.


 
He might be talking about two dimensional films with weak plot and character development, made primarily to appeal to a prurient interest in seeing blood and gore dressed up as a story.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 10, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Nope, not at all. It's more like exposing the frameworks on which these things occur. _._


 
What was it we learned from Inglourious Basterds?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 10, 2013)

ReturnOfElfman said:


> Just saw it. Brilliant. One of his best films and so much better than IB (thankfully). .


 
There is nothing in Django that can hold a candle to the basement restaurant meeting scene in Basterds.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 10, 2013)

Reno said:


> . Will Smith is the most vanilla and least edgy of all black male film stars, .


 
That'd be Denzel Washington


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 10, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> He might be talking about two dimensional films with weak plot and character development, made primarily to appeal to a prurient interest in seeing blood and gore dressed up as a story.


 

remember that its always pastiche with tarintino. You don't need character development for that. Yes, good dialouge and exciting situations but its all done as cipher but not quite- the wronged man who seeks his woman, the criminal making one last move, the family man who seeks vengeance. In the framework of pastiche its not necessary to flesh a character out much- its not meant to be a character study ever. Thats not how he does it.

amusing to see one so liberated concerned with prurience tho


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 10, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> remember that its always pastiche with tarintino. You don't need character development for that. Yes, good dialouge and exciting situations but its all done as cipher but not quite- the wronged man who seeks his woman, the criminal making one last move, the family man who seeks vengeance. In the framework of pastiche its not necessary to flesh a character out much- its not meant to be a character study ever. Thats not how he does it.
> 
> amusing to see one so liberated concerned with prurience tho


 
I'm not concerned with prurience; what I'm doing is recognizing what many of Tarantino's films actually are. Watch them if one will; but don't make out like they are great works of fiction, or biting social commentary.

As for characterization, Waltz' character gets plenty of it, Jackson's gets some, but more as caricature, and Django and Broomhilde basically get none. Compare that with the character development in Basterds - that's one of the things that makes it the superior movie.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 10, 2013)

How are the not great works of fiction? They're always great stories and they are always immensely entertaining. Book reviewers say 'rollicking', don't they?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 10, 2013)

buckles were swashed


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 10, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> I'm not concerned with prurience; what I'm doing is recognizing what many of Tarantino's films actually are. Watch them if one will; *but don't make out like they are great works of fiction, or biting social commentary.*
> 
> As for characterization, Waltz' character gets plenty of it, Jackson's gets some, but more as caricature, and Django and Broomhilde basically get none. Compare that with the character development in Basterds - that's one of the things that makes it the superior movie.


 
I never have tbh

They're all caricatures. Thats how it works.


----------



## Jackobi (Jan 10, 2013)

The cameo role was awful, cringeworthy. I have a new found respect for Leonardo DiCaprio, his character was horrific and chilling.
One of few films I have seen recently that I could happily watch again a few days later.


----------



## la ressistance (Jan 11, 2013)

Very enjoyable. As good as waltz always is I actually thought foxx stole the show from him. Brilliantly understated performance. Samuel and  Gilbert grape both brilliant too.


----------



## la ressistance (Jan 11, 2013)

Jackobi said:


> The cameo role was awful, cringeworthy. I have a new found respect for Leonardo DiCaprio, his character was horrific and chilling.
> One of few films I have seen recently that I could happily watch again a few days later.


 agreed


----------



## la ressistance (Jan 11, 2013)

http://www.channel4.com/news/tarantino-uncut-when-quentin-met-krishnan-transcript


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> I never have tbh
> 
> They're all caricatures. Thats how it works.


 
No. Some are developed characters. Some are caricatures.


----------



## Firky (Jan 11, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> No. Some are developed characters. Some are caricatures.


 
Aye!


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 11, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> No. Some are developed characters. Some are caricatures.


 
who to who? to my mind they were all broad strokes, perhaps save the enigmatic german!

Samuel L struck me as a particularly crude cipher of house y'know. I'l give youthe german though- the rest were cartoon


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 11, 2013)

really did enjoy him out of titanic in this though, he delivered a menacing evil role well.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> who to who? to my mind they were all broad strokes, perhaps save the enigmatic german!
> 
> Samuel L struck me as a particularly crude cipher of house y'know. I'l give youthe german though- the rest were cartoon


 
Di Caprio's character had some development as well.

You've seen the film now: isn't Jackson's character a dead ringer, even down to how he looks, for Uncle Ruckus from The Boondocks?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 11, 2013)

plus the way blood works in this- it totally conforms to that older style. Big massivese sprays of blood like they have a timed bloodpack on the actor to go off when getting that shot.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

Looks like I'm not the only one to notice...


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 11, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Di Caprio's character had some development as well.
> 
> You've seen the film now: isn't Jackson's character a dead ringer, even down to how he looks, for Uncle Ruckus from The Boondocks?


 
Did he? how so? As I saw he went from having a slave tornapart by dogs to aknowledging the 'smartness' of django then getting deaded

Throw me a still from that, I've not seen it-I'm no film buff.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 11, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Looks like I'm not the only one to notice...


 

surely that has to be intentional, tarantino is an inveterate film watcher


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> plus the way blood works in this- it totally conforms to that older style. Big massivese sprays of blood like they have a timed bloodpack on the actor to go off when getting that shot.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> surely that has to be intentional, tarantino is an inveterate film watcher


 
I guess rather than create an Uncle Tom, just lift one holus bolus from a different work of fiction.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 11, 2013)

pastiche does not create eh


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 11, 2013)

or rather it does but uses the tropes to frame the examples of how the thing works.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> pastiche does not create eh


 
I thought the pastiche referred to the original Django film.

Uncle Ruckus wasn't in it.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 11, 2013)

oh I see, at cross purposes then- I'm sure uncle ruckus had his cinematic forebears tho


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> oh I see, at cross purposes then- I'm sure uncle ruckus had his cinematic forebears tho


 
This was just a straight lifting of the character. If you closed your eyes, you could have been watching the Boondocks. So in other words, the only  [even half-developed] black character in the film.... comes from a different work of fiction.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

"He'p me, Django!"  ​


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 11, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> This was just a straight lifting of the character. If you closed your eyes, you could have been watching the Boondocks. So in other words, the only [even half-developed] black character in the film.... comes from a different work of fiction.


 

so you're saying that in a pastiche the character was lifted from elsewhere? Stop press.

interesting where it was lifted from though- you and tarantino spot where I did did not.

Mind you I was having a wank over the soundtrack


----------



## ymu (Jan 11, 2013)

Tarantino always presents us with cartoon characters - those played by Christoph Waltz included - and his films are primarily tributes to film itself, including the casting.



Spoiler: mentions scenes in the film



There's a clear shift in power between the two characters, which occurs on the ride to Candieland, when King Schulz cannot stomach the attitudes on display and it is Django who has to remind him of their goal. Django transitions from an ex-slave who cannot walk into a saloon bar unchallenged, to a man who can persuade three white overseers to unchain him and hand him a gun. That scene was the culmination of his transition to free man. King Schulz's power began to wane the moment he stepped foot in Mississippi; he really. really cannot abide these cunt and that affects his ability to manipulate the situation, and so Django has to take charge.

Which is what I mean about this being very much the mythical, 'white' version of a history that Tarantino seems to think is somewhat accurate. It would have been possible to do the same film with a band of black bounty hunters from the North - much more along the lines of Inglourious Basterds - but he chose to use an anti-racist white man as the key to freedom for a single slave avenger, the "one nigger in ten thousand" who will stand up to slavery. Although I doubt it was a conscious choice, in those terms, it reflects this comment in the article Orang Utan posted:



> In my sixteen years of teaching African-American history, one sadly common theme has been the number of black students who shy away from courses dealing with slavery out of shame that slaves never fought back.
> 
> Read more: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/culture/2013/01/how-accurate-is-quentin-tarantinos-portrayal-of-slavery-in-django-unchained.html#ixzz2HdADCV00​


It's not fair to say, as some reviewers (and the author above) have, that every other slave character was passive. Those who were freed with Django at the beginning got their revenge, and those freed with him at the end had more than admiration in those expressions the camera lingered over as he rode off, and there was no shortage of hatred expressed by those on the journey to Candieland. The (mostly) passivity and (sometimes) active collaboration was from the house slaves, and I think the extreme contrast he drew was to make a point about the suffocating institution of slavery, where even some slaves can be co-opted into oppressing the rest simply by treating them well. (There is a _lot_ about class in this film.)


 
I think a lot of the discussion of this film is being distracted by debate about use of the word "nigger". I'm with Samuel L on this (those who object seem also to be those who refuse to say/spell out the word, in any context, ever) and Tarantino (it's the South in 1958 ffs). But even in Tarantino's other films, he doesn't use the word out of context (barring possibly his cameo in Pulp Fiction, but he's such a bad actor, it's hard to tell who the character was supposed to be). There are much more interesting points for Spike Lee to be making, if only he'd watch the damn film.


----------



## ymu (Jan 11, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> I guess rather than create an Uncle Tom, just lift one holus bolus from a different work of fiction.


But that's what Tarantino does. His entire opus is a tribute to other works of fiction. The concept of a mandingo was invented by a seventies movie.

The resemblance to another character is not plagiarism, it is a reference.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

ymu said:


> But that's what Tarantino does. His entire opus is a tribute to other works of fiction. The concept of a mandingo was invented by a seventies movie.
> 
> The resemblance to another character is not plagiarism, it is a reference.


 
Uncle Ruckus??

Is it un hommage to Uncle Ruckus?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

p.s. when did Tarantino get sainted such that he can't make an average film, or lift a character?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

ymu said:


> I think a lot of the discussion of this film is being distracted by debate about use of the word "nigger".


 
Who is getting distracted? I think most people realize that you can't make a movie about the South in the 1850 that has any verisimilitude, and leave out the word 'nigger'.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

ymu said:


> There are much more interesting points for Spike Lee to be making, if only he'd watch the damn film.


 

Lee says this:



> "It'd be disrespectful to my ancestors to see that film. That's the only thing I'm going to say. I can't disrespect my ancestors," Lee told VibeTV in a recent interview.


 
You telling him he's wrong to feel that way?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 11, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> p.s. when did Tarantino get sainted such that he can't make an average film, or lift a character?


 

who said he did? the missis loved Inglorious, I thought it was whack daddy-o etc

Lifting characters is part and parcel ennit. Cos of how he does things, the pastiche.

I have to say tho, I had never heard this before Jackie Brown



and it is a tune


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 11, 2013)

I think she loved inglorious for the bit where hitler gets blown up


----------



## ymu (Jan 11, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Uncle Ruckus??
> 
> Is it un hommage to Uncle Ruckus?


A reference more than homage, I think. Homage would imply fondness and there is nothing sympathetic about the Stephen character.


----------



## ymu (Jan 11, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Lee says this:
> 
> 
> 
> You telling him he's wrong to feel that way?


No. If you click the spoiler box I give all sorts of reasons why he is right to feel that way. But he can only talk about the use of the n-word because he won't see the film.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> who said he did? the missis loved Inglorious, I thought it was whack daddy-o etc
> 
> Lifting characters is part and parcel ennit. Cos of how he does things, the pastiche.
> 
> ...




If you like that sort of thing, you'll probably like this:


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

ymu said:


> A reference more than homage, I think. Homage would imply fondness and there is nothing sympathetic about the Stephen character.


 
You see, that's the problem. Uncle Ruckus is such a gross caricature, that you develop a bit of a fondness for him. Jackson doesn't come across as evil, he comes across as a confused, crotchety, buffoonish old nigra.


----------



## ymu (Jan 11, 2013)

Yes, that's a good point. We hate him for screwing over Django and Broomhilda more than for who he fundamentally is.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

ymu said:


> Yes, that's a good point. We hate him for screwing over Django and Broomhilda more than for who he fundamentally is.


 
What he does is smell a rat - he figures that Django and Broomhilde know each other, and that some kind of scam is going down. In fact, he's right. He's watching out for his master's interests. Misguided, sure, but he pays a really heavy penalty for that loyalty.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 11, 2013)

thus perish all collaborationists


yes i know


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

One of the problems with the film, imo, is that the grand guignol bloodletting finale is over the top with respect to the bad behavior of the movie's antagonists. In Basterds, a lot of explanation wasn't required as to why it was a good idea to burn and machine gun the Nazi High Command to death.

In Django, I think Tarantino backed away from the really horrific portrayals of slavery that would have had the audience baying for Di Caprio's blood.


----------



## ymu (Jan 11, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> What he does is smell a rat - he figures that Django and Broomhilde know each other, and that some kind of scam is going down. In fact, he's right. He's watching out for his master's interests. Misguided, sure, but he pays a really heavy penalty for that loyalty.


 
You can understand his motives without approving of his collaboration. Like Django said earlier in the film, before we meet Stephen, the lowest of the low is the head house slave.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> thus perish all collaborationists
> 
> 
> yes i know


 
It's not fair to call slaves who did their master's bidding, collaborationists. Collaborationists, such as some French during WW2, have known a different way of life, and choose what turns out to be the wrong path.

When you and your ancestors have been in bondage for centuries, the whole concept of 'choice' comes into question.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

ymu said:


> You can understand his motives without approving of his collaboration. Like Django said earlier in the film, before we meet Stephen, the lowest of the low is the head house slave.


 

Sure he says that. But what does Stephen actually do - yell at some serving girls about the cutlery?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 11, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> It's not fair to call slaves who did their master's bidding, collaborationists. Collaborationists, such as some French during WW2, have known a different way of life, and choose what turns out to be the wrong path.
> 
> When you and your ancestors have been in bondage for centuries, the whole concept of 'choice' comes into question.


 

aye, thats the 'I know' bit of my post. It would have been entirely unrealistic at all to expect an aged house master type slave who was able to berate the young master and raised your daddy etc to suddenly leap towards emancipation of the kind offered by django ennit.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

ymu said:


> You can understand his motives without approving of his collaboration. Like Django said earlier in the film, before we meet Stephen, the lowest of the low is the head house slave.


 
And don't forget: the words coming out of Django's mouth about house slaves, were written by Tarantino.

Who the fuck is he to judge the motivations of a slave in 1850?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 11, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> And don't forget: the words coming out of Django's mouth about house slaves, were written by Tarantino.
> 
> Who the fuck is he to judge the motivations of a slave in 1850?


 

he was doing his pulp thing though, I don't expect he was going for verisimilitude there jon


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 11, 2013)

theres room to argue wether it was right to do so or valid to write so but not wether he was going for authenticity. He wasn't. If you think he was you've missed the point


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 11, 2013)

.


----------



## ymu (Jan 11, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> One of the problems with the film, imo, is that the grand guignol bloodletting finale is over the top with respect to the bad behavior of the movie's antagonists. In Basterds, a lot of explanation wasn't required as to why it was a good idea to burn and machine gun the Nazi High Command to death.
> 
> In Django, I think Tarantino backed away from the really horrific portrayals of slavery that would have had the audience baying for Di Caprio's blood.


We weren't?

It was pretty horrific, although Tarantino has said that the original edits were much more horrific. He bowed to more delicate sensibilities.

He was also looking to emphasise the distance between the house slaves and others, which is perhaps why he showed more good treatment of house slaves than punishment (just the whipping scene where Django kills the first Brittle brother and Broomhilde's incarceration), and in other scenes had them skipping through the meadow, playing on swings and being treated as an equal in a high-class social situation.

Inglourious Basterds opens with a Jewish family being hidden and discovered; I don't know what point you're making here. Any revenge fantasy needs to make us feel a visceral hatred for the targets of the revenge.


----------



## ymu (Jan 11, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Sure he says that. But what does Stephen actually do - yell at some serving girls about the cutlery?


Oversees punishment of other slaves. Some quite horrific punishment. It's mentioned explicitly a number of times in the film.


----------



## ymu (Jan 11, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> And don't forget: the words coming out of Django's mouth about house slaves, were written by Tarantino.
> 
> Who the fuck is he to judge the motivations of a slave in 1850?


It would be interesting to know to what extent that conflict existed. The divide-and-rule analogy with class is obvious and I think Tarantino is aware of that, but I don't know how historically accurate it is. Perhaps he was reaching for ways to excuse the 'passive slaves' mythology, when if he'd known more of the real history he could have blown it apart?


----------



## ymu (Jan 11, 2013)

Spike Lee should do a remake.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> theres room to argue wether it was right to do so or valid to write so but not wether he was going for authenticity. He wasn't. If you think he was you've missed the point


 
No, I get the point. Even the ads call this a 'revenge movie'. In other words, it's a two dimensional remake of an old spaghetti western with the added wrinkle that a slave gets to shoot up some white slavers. That's all fine, but in the end, it's just a forgettable action film. It's not a magnum opus. But people wax ecstatic about it. It's not at that level, imo.

Don't know if you've ever seen an old tv show called Hogan's Heroes. It's a comedy set in a German Stalag prison camp. It's pretty funny. You get to laugh at the dumb germans. All fine for entertainment purposes, so long as you don't ever mistake it for anything serious.

I think Django is Hogan's Heroes set in the antebellum South, with the kicker that at the end, Hogan and the boys massacre Klink and Sgt Schultz with machetes. The scene with the hooded riders is funny, so long as you take it for what it is - which is nowhere near a truth where those riders in real life would have considered slaves nothing more than cattle, to be treated that way.

Tarantino uses slavery as a gimmick to give us some comedy and some bloodshed. That's all it is.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

ymu said:


> Perhaps he was reaching for ways to excuse the 'passive slaves' mythology,


Stephen doesn't get excused. He gets shot to shit.


----------



## ymu (Jan 11, 2013)

And deserved to. He got killed for being active, not passive. The other house slaves were freed.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

ymu said:


> And deserved to..


 
What did he do that deserved death?


----------



## ymu (Jan 11, 2013)

Did you watch the film?

Remember the Bond villain scene where, instead of opting for a quick and certain death for Django, he laid out the sadistic alternative?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

ymu said:


> Did you watch the film?
> 
> Remember the Bond villain scene where, instead of opting for a quick and certain death for Django, he laid out the sadistic alternative?


 
I saw it when it came out at christmas. I can't remember all the fine details.

Remind me: did Stephen actually kill or hurt anyone badly before Django and Waltz start shooting?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 11, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> What did he do that deserved death?


 

active collaboration-yes we can make the case that an elderly house slave with freedom to even berate the master etc


and the sad fact that aged or not the opressed will become complicit in their own postion under the heel

You know what I said to the missis on hearing of this film? I said 'I dunno, I like tarantinos films but i'm not sure ho well he can handle the slavery issue'


There's other films where ccollabs are killed- Wind That Shakes The Barley for instance. Done with a lot more sensitivity. But in a struggle between powers where you find people from your side on the side of the enemy? have you places to keep him till the war is done? can you trust him left behind? blergh


----------



## ymu (Jan 11, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> I saw it when it came out at christmas. I can't remember all the fine details.
> 
> Remind me: did Stephen actually kill or hurt anyone badly before Django and Waltz start shooting?


What the fuck has that got to do with anything? You're excusing his actions on the grounds that ... killing Candie was wrong???

He chose to help stop Django rather than help win all their freedoms. In a revenge fantasy, that makes him a dead man.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> active collaboration-yes we can make the case that an elderly house slave with freedom to even berate the master etc
> 
> 
> and the sad fact that aged or not the opressed will become complicit in their own postion under the heel
> ...


 
Elderly house slaves maybe could be familiar with their masters, but they weren't free. They might have had it better than a slave picking cotton, but they didn't have a gun. They weren't overseers. Their 'freedom' only went so far, and not very far at that.


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 11, 2013)

I watched it last night. It was all right for a Thursday night sat on the sofa with laryngitis and a bowl full of soup sorta thing


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 11, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Remind me: did Stephen actually kill or hurt anyone badly before Django and Waltz start shooting?


 


Spoiler



In Candie's absence he ordered the hunting down by dogs of one runaway slave and the use of the hot box for another. While we don't see him making these orders, he tells us that he did. He also spends some time later in the film detailing the types of violent punishments he has delivered at Candie land in the past.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 11, 2013)

Did anyone else notice James Remar appear in two different roles in the film?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 11, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> I like his Top Gun rant in that film that otherwise is so unmemorable that its name escapes me.


Reality Bites I think


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 11, 2013)

Nah, that was a slackery grunge type film with Winona in it.
It was Sleep With Me


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 11, 2013)

Anyway, who is Uncle Ruckus and who are the Boondocks? 
I don't think many Brits would get any references to them


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 11, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> Anyway, who is Uncle Ruckus and who are the Boondocks?
> I don't think many Brits would get any references to them


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 11, 2013)

Did you google that or did you know who/what it is?


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 11, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> Did you google that or did you know who/what it is?


I googled it when it came up on the thread mucker


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 11, 2013)

I wish people could exchange information with each other in a normal way sometimes.
I shall wait til Johnny comes back. Perhaps he will explain in his own words.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 11, 2013)

In terms of Django being an underwritten character.....he's meant to be. Django is supposed to be the silent type with nothing but revenge on his mind.

To me, this Django has too much to say. Tarantino has trouble with writing quiet characters.

Robert Forster's character in Jackie Brown was a good quiet hero.....with a liking for 70s soul.....


----------



## Reno (Jan 11, 2013)

Nanker Phelge said:


> In terms of Django being an underwritten character.....he's meant to be. Django is supposed to be the silent type with nothing but revenge on his mind.
> 
> To me, this Django has too much to say. Tarantino has trouble with writing quiet characters.
> 
> Robert Forster's character in Jackie Brown was a good quiet hero.....with a liking for 70s soul.....


 
It's a problem though when he's up against a compellingly articulate characer and when Tarrantino cast a rather uncharismatic actor as Django next to a wildly charismatic one.

Both the Robert Foster and Pam Grier characters in Jackie Brown feel like the most rounded and recognisably human characters in any Tarrantino film. It's the only time he did something liek a character study.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 11, 2013)

Reno said:


> It's a problem though when he's up against a compellingly articulate characer and when Tarrantino cast a rather uncharismatic actor as Django next to a wildly charismatic one.
> 
> Both the Robert Foster and Pam Grier characters in Jackie Brown feel like the most rounded and recognisably human characters in any Tarrantino film. It's the only time he did something liek a character study.


 
I think with Jackie Brown he benefitted from having an existing story to adapt into a screenplay.

His own stories and run away with themselves a bit. He may well be fantastic at dialogue and he can get away with long scenes, but it doesn't always work.


----------



## Reno (Jan 11, 2013)

Nanker Phelge said:


> I think with Jackie Brown he benefitted from having an existing story to adapt into a screenplay.


 
True. And that was helped by casting two fantastic actors who rarely get to show what they were capable of till then.


----------



## ymu (Jan 11, 2013)

Interesting review: Django Unchained: is its portrayal of slavery too flippant?


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 11, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> I wish people could exchange information with each other in a normal way sometimes.
> I shall wait til Johnny comes back. Perhaps he will explain in his own words.


Ahh i'm sorry i wasted your time with my unconventional way of responding to your inquiry


----------



## ska invita (Jan 11, 2013)

I just saw a poster for it with the strapline The D Is Silent... er, no its not.


----------



## ymu (Jan 11, 2013)




----------



## D'wards (Jan 11, 2013)

Does anyone know, were slaveowners/plantation owners allowed to arbitarily kil their slaves?

Would anyone ever investigate?

Probably not.


----------



## Reno (Jan 11, 2013)

D'wards said:


> Does anyone know, were slaveowners/plantation owners allowed to arbitarily kil their slaves?
> 
> Would anyone ever investigate?
> 
> Probably not.


 
It depended on the US State and time. In some States actual laws were passed that allowed the killing of slaves, in others there were laws that in theory gave slaves some protection, but I doubt a slave owner would have been punished for killing slaves. Owners were more likely to get punished for not recapturing and punishing slaves who had escaped, rather than for torturing, raping or killing them.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> Anyway, who is Uncle Ruckus and who are the Boondocks?
> I don't think many Brits would get any references to them


 
Younger ones might.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

ska invita said:


> I just saw a poster for it with the strapline The D Is Silent... er, no its not.


 
Yes it is, just like Djibouti


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

D'wards said:


> Does anyone know, were slaveowners/plantation owners allowed to arbitarily kil their slaves?
> 
> 
> .


 
Of course they could. Just like they could shoot a horse or whip a dog.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 11, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Yes it is, just like Djibouti


no its not


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

Reno said:


> in others there were laws that in theory gave slaves some protection,.


 
Are there any examples from the pre-Abolition South?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 11, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Yes it is, just like Djibouti


Is it even possible to pronounce it with the D. A J kinda starts with that sound anyway


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

ska invita said:


> no its not


 
What do you say: Duh-jango?


----------



## ska invita (Jan 11, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> Is it even possible to pronounce it with the D. A J kinda starts with that sound anyway


exactly, except you do put a tiny D in there. Thats why its there
Jango without that D - thats jsut wrong and dumbed down
likewise Djibouti


----------



## ska invita (Jan 11, 2013)

and like *D*javan


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

ska invita said:


> exactly, except you do put a tiny D in there. Thats why its there
> Jango without that D - thats jsut wrong and dumbed down
> likewise Djibouti


 
So, it is..... Duh-jango for you?


----------



## ska invita (Jan 11, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> So, it is..... Duh-jango for you?


No, its Django for me - but its also Duh-Johnny for me


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 11, 2013)

Zildjan


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 11, 2013)

ska invita said:


> exactly, except you do put a tiny D in there. Thats why its there
> Jango without that D - thats jsut wrong and dumbed down
> likewise Djibouti


Sorry. I meant without the D.
How else do you pronounce Django? It's the same as Jango.
Like D-jax Up Beats and Djungle Fever!


----------



## ska invita (Jan 11, 2013)

djagetme?


----------



## Jackobi (Jan 11, 2013)

ska invita said:


> exactly, except you do put a tiny D in there. Thats why its there
> Jango without that D - thats jsut wrong and dumbed down
> likewise Djibouti





Orang Utan said:


> Sorry. I meant without the D.
> How else do you pronounce Django? It's the same as Jango.
> Like D-jax Up Beats and Djungle Fever!


 
: D


----------



## ska invita (Jan 11, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> How else do you pronounce Django? It's the same as Jango.


its very close, almost imperceptible, but its different and its there, and thats why theres lots of DJ words from other countries...it doesnt exist in anglo-american but that doesnt mean it doesnt exist...its a very soft d sound as you go in to the J.

On the wagon this Djanuary...be prepared for a lot more of this kind of thing. No Whiskey in the Djar


----------



## ska invita (Jan 11, 2013)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dja_Faunal_Reserve


----------



## mentalchik (Jan 11, 2013)

ska invita said:


> its very close, almost imperceptible, but its different and its there, and thats why theres lots of DJ words from other countries...it doesnt exist in anglo-american but that doesnt mean it doesnt exist...its a very soft d sound as you go in to the J.
> 
> On the wagon this Djanuary...be prepared for a lot more of this kind of thing. No Whiskey in the Djar


 
I know exactly what you mean and it is different to just jango........very small difference but there all the same


----------



## ska invita (Jan 11, 2013)

mentalchik said:


> I know exactly what you mean and it is different to just jango........very small difference but there all the same


If this "silent D" crap is in the script its a very disappointing sign...if I hear Django pronounced without the D in this movie Im walking out


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 11, 2013)

Now I've said it repeatedly to myself, I can see a very subtle difference 
It's like the difference between fat and phat


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

ska invita said:


> No, its Django for me - but its also Duh-Johnny for me


 
They have therapists who can assist with that sort of thing.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 11, 2013)

Undertaker, prepare another coffin


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

ska invita said:


> If this "silent D" crap is in the script its a very disappointing sign...if I hear Django pronounced without the D in this movie Im walking out


 
In the movie they say Jango.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 11, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> In the movie they say Jango.


Philistines. And to gloat about it on the poster and make it a catch phrase


----------



## ska invita (Jan 11, 2013)

If this Django was really a bad-ass he'd make a fucking point of it being pronounce with a D and shoot any two-bit horse-rustler who didnt make the effort


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 11, 2013)

ska invita said:


> Philistines. And to gloat about it on the poster and make it a catch phrase


Eh? How?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 11, 2013)

ska invita said:


> If this Django was really a bad-ass he'd make a fucking point of it being pronounce with a D and shoot any two-bit horse-rustler who didnt make the effort


 
He's an ex slave. Probably can't read or write.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 12, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> Eh? How?


I saw it in big on the side of a bus today.

Another example is in polish there are three types of Z - Z, Ź, Ż as well as Dź, Dz, and might even be more - all slightly differently pronounced.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 12, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> He's an ex slave. Probably can't read or write.


racist
are you saying he cant hear the sound of his own name either?

This has been fun, but im off to do something now! thanks for the entertainment


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 12, 2013)

ska invita said:


> I saw it in big on the side of a bus today.
> 
> Another example is in polish there are three types of Z - Z, Ź, Ż as well as Dź, Dz, and might even be more - all slightly differently pronounced.


 
What does the pronunciation of Polish words have to do with anything.

Django is not Polish.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 12, 2013)

ska invita said:


> I saw it in big on the side of a bus today.
> .


Saw what? A guide to how to pronounce Django?
"They Call Me MISTER D-Jango"?


----------



## D'wards (Jan 12, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> He's an ex slave. Probably can't read or write.


  Yes he can


----------



## ymu (Jan 12, 2013)

Nanker Phelge said:


> Did anyone else notice James Remar appear in two different roles in the film?


He is too. Well spotted.


----------



## D'wards (Jan 12, 2013)

ymu said:


> He is too. Well spotted.


Yeah, was slightly confused for a moment there...


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 12, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Yes it is, just like Djibouti


Pronounced "do ya booty"


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 12, 2013)

ska invita said:


> and like *D*javan



Pronounced "Donovan"


----------



## Reno (Jan 12, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Are there any examples from the pre-Abolition South?


 
From what I understand, the Louisiana Code Noir from 1724 gave slaves certain rights and protections they didn't have in other states.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 12, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> What does the pronunciation of Polish words have to do with anything.
> 
> Django is not Polish.


There is more than one phonetic sound in the world beyond an anglo-american J, theres scores of similiar-but-different ones around the world. Some languages (like Polish) have lots of minute differences around that sound (Dź is basically equivalent to Dj I think). Django isnt an anglo-american name, and whatever the correct pronunciation of Django (tbh fuck knows what it is - it may well be silent - i think the name is originally Romany - or could be Hispanic - if there was a Portuguese root that would settle it as a Dj sound ) the fact you cant even imagine it to be something other than Jango says everything. Im sticking with Django though.



friedaweed said:


> Pronounced "do ya booty"


oh yeah, fair enough, but at least the D isnt silent 


friedaweed said:


> Pronounced "Donovan"


not in my house its not!



Orang Utan said:


> Saw what? A guide to how to pronounce Django?
> "They Call Me MISTER D-Jango"?


I cant find a picture of the bus advert but look on a bus and youll see one soon enough - the D is Silent is the big strapline for the film on those posters.
can find this though









Anyway, its probably more than enough of this...apologies


----------



## ska invita (Jan 12, 2013)

Here we go - someone who knows what theyre talking about
https://thoughtstreams.io/jtauber/the-pronunciation-of-django/

Back at DjangoCon 2009, I gave a lightning talk on the pronunciation of "Django". One of the things I ranted about at the time was that the Django FAQ was incorrect in saying "the D is silent".

So it's very frustrating to hear this falsehood perpetuated on the big screen in Quentin Tarantino's Django Unchained where the eponymous character spells his name, adding "the D is silent".
created Dec. 28, 2012, 4:54 a.m. 

The D is not silent, it's very much pronounced.

In IPA, the correct French pronunciation of Django Reinhart's is /​dʒɑ̃ɡo/ although most native English speakers who get it "correct" are happy to say /dʒæŋɡəʊ/. Notice the /d/ at the start.

EDIT: as clarified below, this wording is a little sloppy as it suggests /d͡ʒ/ is just the stop+fricative and not the affricate.

Here's an attempt at a simpler explanation:

Django is pronounced with an initial sound that, in English is often written "j". This might lead one to think of the "D" as silent with the "j" being pronounced the way it is in English.

However, that doesn't explain why the "D" is there in the first place.

A more insightful way to think of it is to remember it's a French spelling. Think of the "j" as being pronounced as in French. Now put a "d" sound in front of it. When the "d" sound and "j" sound merge, you get something called an affricate. This particular affricate is the same sound used in English to pronounce just "j".

So a French "dj" is like an English "j". The "d" isn't silent, though, because the French "j" is not the same as the English "j".


----------



## 8115 (Jan 12, 2013)

Bit like the m/b at the start of Mumbai/ Bombay I would guess?


----------



## thriller (Jan 12, 2013)

shit thread. more talk on history and pronouunciation than discussion on the film itself.


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 12, 2013)

thriller said:


> shit thread. more talk on history and pronouunciation than discussion on the film itself.


In fairness it's the only way the fillum would have actually got 9 pages of posts though


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 12, 2013)

thriller said:


> shit thread. more talk on history and pronouunciation than discussion on the film itself.


So what? They both are relevant, esp the history.
Moron


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 12, 2013)

Nice touch having Russ Tamblyn as The Son of a Gunfighter.

Woulda been nice to see more of Zoe Bell....cos I think she's ace!

Also enjoyed a brief glimpse of Bruce Dern and the dark haired one from Dukes of Hazard!


----------



## peterkro (Jan 12, 2013)

I watched it this morning and was surprised in that I thought it reasonably good.Tarintino seems to me to be taking the piss out of Hollywood,the whole individualist,vigilante,gun obsession,lack of collective action business is pure Hollywood and by association Washington ("Hollywood springs from the same DNA as Washington").He seems to be trying to make a serious point about American films while raising an important historical point missing from the "Western".

This of course could be complete bollocks and I may be over thinking it.But more importantly (I don't think this is a spoiler) what were the Australian accents about in the cage/dynamite scene (keep in mind I don't watch many films so if it's some sort of cinematic reference it's gone right over my head).Best I can say is it wasn't shit.

Ah I googled the Oz accents bit and apparently the explanation is on the cutting room floor,The ozzies were taken by the mining company from oz and work for the company for no pay,in the missing bit Django points out to them that makes them slaves too.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 12, 2013)

Reno said:


> From what I understand, the Louisiana Code Noir from 1724 gave slaves certain rights and protections they didn't have in other states.


 
Prior to 1803 and the Louisiana Purchase, Louisiana was a French colony. The Code Noir applied to French Possessions, not to US states; even so, the sections limiting use of force against slaves was never enforced by the French.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 12, 2013)

ska invita said:


> Here we go - someone who knows what theyre talking about
> https://thoughtstreams.io/jtauber/the-pronunciation-of-django/
> 
> Back at DjangoCon 2009, I gave a lightning talk on the pronunciation of "Django". One of the things I ranted about at the time was that the Django FAQ was incorrect in saying "the D is silent".
> ...


 

Tarantino made the film. He says the D is silent. We're discussing the film.

The D is silent.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 12, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Tarantino made the film. He says the D is silent. We're discussing the film.
> 
> The D is silent.


yep.
and the character can decide for himself how he understands his own name i guess.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 12, 2013)

ska invita said:


> yep.
> and the character can decide for himself how he understands his own name i guess.


 
It's in the script!


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 12, 2013)

ska invita said:


> There is more than one phonetic sound in the world beyond an anglo-american J,


 
But....but.... this movie was made in Hollywood, not Gdansk.


----------



## ymu (Jan 13, 2013)

The point of that scene being to contrast with his hesitancy when reading out the wanted poster earlier. All part of the transition to free man. Character development, doncha know.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 13, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> But....but.... this movie was made in Hollywood, not Gdansk.


I think we're finished here JC - we've established the correct pronunciation is with a D - a sound perfectly easily pronounceable by americans (and canadians!). All the Django movies that have gone before are pronounced with that D (you can clearly hear the D in the original main theme for example)

Considering what a cinaboffin Tarantino is youd have thought he'd want to keep in the tradition but what Tarantino and Hollywood does is up to them. Leaving the D in isn't beyond Hollywood, southern characters or a US audience. IF the characters name was José, i presume hollywood wouldnt insist on pronouncing it "joes"


Anyone would think we havent got anything better to do eh.


----------



## D'wards (Jan 13, 2013)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2013/jan/09/django-unchained-action-figures

After reading this article i immediately pre-ordered the 4 main characters late last night on the presumption that the more controversial they are the more collectable they will become. Seemed like a good idea at the time.


----------



## camouflage (Jan 13, 2013)

Crispy said:


> Cos it's a "Western" genre film, but set in the South, see? Starring Jamie Foxx as the eponymous slave, freed on the condition that he help hunt down a gang. Looks like a Tarantino movie, so if you like those, you'll probably like this
> 
> 
> 
> Completely incongruous soundtrack in that trailer




Saw this last night, kinda reminded me of a cross between Inglorious Basterds, Blazing Saddles and... Schindlers List or something in terms of the portrayal of a hellish society ravenously devouring dehumanized human flesh in a sort of orgy of unchallenged cannibal-capitalism. they really laid it on with the n word don't they, I reckon Tarantino really likes using the n word, I first got that impression by the way he liked to roll it around in Pulp Fiction. Nice for the Germans to have been represented by a good guy this time round eh.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 13, 2013)

Watched this again yesterday with Nanker Jnr, and like all Tarantino films after the first viewing the cracks are more apparent, but the fun doesn't really fade.

DiCaprio actually does a pretty great job in it, his acting is flawless and he plays it straight in his panto-villain role.....

Jackson grows more sinister with every viewing, playing all angles to keep his hide from a whooping.

Sadly....Foxx remains as one dimensional as he did first time around.

The Soundtrack is possible Tarantino's best yet.....and Inglorious Basterds was pretty fucking special!

Yep.....still good on 2nd viewing.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jan 14, 2013)

Watched it last night and thought it was cracking right up to the point Tarantino made an appearence. It was weird, like he was talking with an australian accent. Don't know what that was about.


----------



## peterkro (Jan 14, 2013)

^^ See post 249.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jan 14, 2013)

peterkro said:


> ^^ See post 249.


 
Ah right, cheers.


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Jan 14, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> So what? They both are relevant, esp the history.
> Moron


that's spelt moroan the a is silent  

It's a great film, though tbf there are some scenes which he's aping his previous works and some items where the dialogue is recycled to...


----------



## ymu (Jan 14, 2013)

Buckaroo said:


> Watched it last night and thought it was cracking right up to the point Tarantino made an appearence. It was weird, like he was talking with an australian accent. Don't know what that was about.


I saw something about this. These characters were more developed in the original script, but most of it ended up getting cut. They were Australians brought over by the mining company and Django makes a comment about them being much like slaves then, similar to his comment to Candie's lawyer.

Does Tarantino do director's cuts? Have just got hold of _Kill Bill: the whole bloody affair_, which is the two volumes cut as one film with some extra animation that got cut out previously. It'd be interesting to see Django as he wrote it, without time constraints.


----------



## Reno (Jan 14, 2013)

I though Django was long enough already and I at least don't need to see the backstory of characters who are mostly irrelevant to the plot. More isn't always better and with Tarrantino you always get a bit too much anyway.


----------



## D'wards (Jan 19, 2013)

Interesting blog post by Uncle Luke of 2 Live Crew about Spike Lee's reaction to the film.

http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2013/01/spike_lee_is_no_quentin_tarant.php


----------



## ymu (Jan 19, 2013)

Ouch!


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 19, 2013)

D'wards said:


> Interesting blog post by Uncle Luke of 2 Live Crew about Spike Lee's reaction to the film.
> 
> http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2013/01/spike_lee_is_no_quentin_tarant.php


 



> While on the horse, Django tells the slaves that he'll treat them worse than any white man ever will. That's the truth about blacks in positions of authority in today's corporate America. They will treat blacks worse than any white boss every could.


 
Who is this fucking idiot?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 19, 2013)

> When he's not being an ass from his court side seats during New York Knicks games, he's making bull crap films that most African Americans cannot relate to.


 
Fucking idiot.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0783612/

Spike Lee is too busy with reality to make B-movie blaxploitation films, like Taranatino.


----------



## thriller (Jan 19, 2013)

on 2nd viewing, I rather liked this and will be a defo blu ray purchase.


----------



## Firky (Jan 19, 2013)

I have seen it three times


----------



## Firky (Jan 19, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Who is this fucking idiot?


 
Someone who is paid to blog utter shit by the Miami Times so they can make more money from the adverts. He may not be aware how shit he is but his editor(s) will and it works, here we see mentioned on u75 and we'll all take a peak and they'' earn an extra buck. All for employing an idiot.

I haven't read FWIW.


----------



## ymu (Jan 19, 2013)

You should. It's very bitchy. 

He chucks Spike Lee's house negro insult straight back at him. Have to say, he deserved that.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 20, 2013)

ymu said:


> You should. It's very bitchy.
> 
> He chucks Spike Lee's house negro insult straight back at him. Have to say, he deserved that.


 
Have to say, Spike Lee's forefathers were slaves. I'm not going to disparage him for how he feels, whether I think it's reasonable or not. He's entitled to his feelings.

But, typically, white people are smirking at the principled nigger. He can't be principled: he must just be jealous.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 20, 2013)

firky said:


> I have seen it three times


 
How was it for you by time number three?

I've watched Basterds three times. I can't really see myself watching Django that many times. Twice, maybe, when it comes on Netflix.


----------



## Reno (Jan 20, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Fucking idiot.
> 
> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0783612/
> 
> Spike Lee is too busy with reality to make B-movie blaxploitation films, like Taranatino.


 
Have you seen Bamboozled or She Hate Me ?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0215545/
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0384533/


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 20, 2013)

Reno said:


> Have you seen Bamboozled or She Hate Me ?
> 
> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0215545/
> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0384533/


 
No. I've seen When The Levees Broke, though. It's probably the best documentary out there on a shameful chapter of American history.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 20, 2013)

I might watch the one about impregnating wealthy lesbians, though.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 20, 2013)

I wonder if there's much call for that: wealthy lesbians wanting to be impregnated by black males?


----------



## Reno (Jan 20, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> No. I've seen When The Levees Broke, though. It's probably the best documentary out there on a shameful chapter of American history.


 
Yes, it's a good film. However when Lee doesn't make documentaries, most of his films over the last couple of decades have been somewhere between mediocre and bloody awful.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 20, 2013)

Reno said:


> Yes, it's a good film. However when Lee doesn't make documentaries, most of his films over the last couple of decades have been somewhere between mediocre and bloody awful.


 
Doesn't change the fact that When The Levees Broke is one of the most important documentaries ever made on the subject. I'll judge the man by his best work; not his worst.


----------



## Reno (Jan 20, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Doesn't change the fact that When The Levees Broke is one of the most important documentaries ever made on the subject. I'll judge the man by his best work; not his worst.


 
I was just saying, because it's fair to say that most of Lee's films haven't connected with black audiences, because most of them have been terrible and have flopped. Django Unchained however has been reported to draw large black audiences and it has been getting a debate going about slavery and it's representation on film (may that be good or bad) and while the article was bitchy, he has a point in what we are getting from Lee is sour grapes.

I presume you saw that one film because it got good reviews, but when someone has made as many bad films as Lee has, then for those who have seen them, it is fair enough to judge him by his body of work. So basically that article you are have been getting on your high horse on over has a point. But you wouldn't know, because you haven't seen most of Lee's films.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 20, 2013)

Reno said:


> I presume you saw that one film because it got good reviews, but when someone has made as many bad films as Lee has, then for those who have seen them, it is fair enough to judge him by his body of work. So basically that article you are have been getting on your high horse on over, has a point.


 
I saw the documentary because I was interested in the subject. I hadn't read any reviews. It was as good as it was because lee rose to the occasion. The depth of his feeling translates onto the screen.

Going with your critical theory: which of these Picassos is his more important work; and which is he more remembered for?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 20, 2013)

Reno said:


> So basically that article you are have been getting on your high horse on over has a point.


 

No, he's a fucking idiot, full of shit.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 20, 2013)

Reno said:


> But you wouldn't know, because you haven't seen most of Lee's films.


 
Ah: you edited to add a dig. How unusual for you! 


So tell me; how many Spike Lee films have I seen?


----------



## Reno (Jan 20, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> I saw the documentary because I was interested in the subject. I hadn't read any reviews. It was as good as it was because lee rose to the occasion. The depth of his feeling translates onto the screen.
> 
> Going with your critical theory: which of these Picassos is his more important work; and which is he more remembered for?


 



Good night.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 20, 2013)

Reno said:


> Good night.


 
The test was pass/fail. You fail.

I haven't seen all of Spike Lee's stuff. I've seen 17 of them, though.

What was your point again, caller?


----------



## ymu (Jan 20, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Have to say, Spike Lee's forefathers were slaves. I'm not going to disparage him for how he feels, whether I think it's reasonable or not. He's entitled to his feelings.
> 
> But, typically, white people are smirking at the principled nigger. He can't be principled: he must just be jealous.


 
So were Samuel L Jackson's and Luther Campbell's. So who gets to decide who's the real black guy?


> Lee derides many of today's black films as "coonish, clownish type work." He says his failure to win an Oscar this year in the documentary category for "4 Little Girls" was predictable, given that the competition -- and ultimate winner -- was a film about the Holocaust. He calls director Quentin Tarantino "ignorant" for his repeated use of the "n-word" in his movie "Jackie Brown." *And for defending Tarantino, Lee likens actor Samuel L. Jackson -- who plays a foulmouthed gangster in the film -- to a "house Negro defending massa.*"
> 
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/features/lee.htm


 

And cut out the white people shit. My partner was bouncing around the room in outrage when he heard that Lee called Jackson Tarantino's house negro. His opinion on Lee is that he was great when he started out, made great films that spoke to black people. Then he went mainstream and forgot about his audience and it's all gone to shit. _When The Levees Broke_ excepted, but fuck me, if he can't sort out some passion about that ...


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 20, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Who is this fucking idiot?


Luke Skyywalker of 2 Live Crew. He's not a particularly enlightened chap.
Here's the lyrics for Pop That Pussy:
[Blowfly]
Go-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-od-DAMN!!
Shee-yee-YIT!!
Look at the asson that bitch!
Look at the titties!
(Mixx scratches Aw hit me! and Hold your legs up on easy.)
Verse 1: [Fresh Kid Ice]
There's only one place where we can go
To see freaky hoes doin' shows
Doin' tricks to make us holler
On a giving night, all for a dollar
Silicone breasts, all on their chests
Nothin' like others, but above the rest
They'll do anything to turn us on
Them hoes got it goin' on!!
[Brother Marquis]
I like big booty and big ol' titties
Bitch, you know you've been fucked by many
So come and be my private dancer
I got some money if that's the answer
I really wanna be with you;
I get hard after seeing you
How hard? Hard like a rock,
When you make that pussy pop!
Chorus (2x): [Luke]
Pop that pussy! Heyyy!
Pop that pussy, baby!
Pop that pussy!
Pop, pop that pussy, baby!
Verse 2: [Fresh Kid Ice]
Freaky bitches with plenty of ass
Rollin' to the music and shakin' real fast
Bend over backwards, make me shout
And work that pussy, in and out
Movin' their body with plenty of action
Bringin' to the men more satisfaction
Doin' what they feel to turn us out
Just work that pussy all the way out!
[Brother Marquis]
Shake it! Don't break it!
It took your momma nine months to make it
Bend over and spread 'em, girl
Show-w-w me those pussy pearls
Rub that ass and play with that clit
You know I like that freaky shit
Girl, you know you look so cute
Throwin' that pussy the way you do!
Chorus
Verse 3: [Fresh Kid Ice]
Poppin' that pussy's a dance for the ladies
Straight from the South, into the 90's
Freaky bitches are the ones I like
In G-strings in the middle of the night
Smoke-filled stages, bitches in cages
Guards at the door, armed with gauges
As they dance and I get hot,
Keep throwin' that pussy! Don't stop!
[Brother Marquis]
I like the way you lick the champagne glass
It makes me wanna stick my dick in your ass
So come on, baby, and pop it quick
I fall in love when you suck my dick
Bitch, you don't know? You ain't heard?
Fuckin' with me, you're gonna get served
See, none of my bitches, they never complain
So come on, baby, and pop that thang!
Chorus
[Luke]
Janet J, pop, that pus-sy!
Bu-bles, pop, that pus-sy!
Sandra P, pop, that pus-sy!
Ma-donna, pop that stinky smelly pussy, baby!
[Mr. Mixx] scratches:
Work this motherfucker!
Shit, this good!
Woo hoo!
Chorus
[Luke]
BREAKDOWN!!


More lyrics: http://www.lyricsmode.com/lyrics/0-9/2_live_crew/


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 20, 2013)

ymu said:


> So were Samuel L Jackson's and Luther Campbell's. So who gets to decide who's the real black guy?..


 
Why is this so hard to get?  Jackson et al can decide for themselves to get on board with Tarantino. They can think that what they are doing has historical value, or whatever.

At the same time, Lee has every right to come to the conclusions he's reached, without being derided or mocked for the principles that he chooses to follow.

His disagreement with Tarantino doesn't somehow make him wrong.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 20, 2013)

ymu said:


> And cut out the white people shit.* My partner was bouncing around the room in outrage when he heard that Lee called Jackson Tarantino's house negro.* His opinion on Lee is that he was great when he started out, made great films that spoke to black people. Then he went mainstream and forgot about his audience and it's all gone to shit. _When The Levees Broke_ excepted, but fuck me, if he can't sort out some passion about that ...


 
Tbh, I don't believe it. Nothing you've written about him so far has made me believe that your partner would act in such a childish, immature way.

He was outraged? Why?

Give me a break.


----------



## ymu (Jan 20, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Why is this so hard to get? Jackson et al can decide for themselves to get on board with Tarantino. They can think that what they are doing has historical value, or whatever.
> 
> At the same time, Lee has every right to come to the conclusions he's reached, without being derided or mocked for the principles that he chooses to follow.
> 
> His disagreement with Tarantino doesn't somehow make him wrong.


I want to know why you object to Campbell levelling a vile anti-black insult at Lee, when he was clearly referencing Lee's own use of that same vile anti-black insult at Jackson.



Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Tbh, I don't believe it. Nothing you've written about him so far has made me believe that your partner would act in such a childish, immature way.
> 
> He was outraged? Why?
> 
> Give me a break.


 
It was the use of that insult that outraged my partner. I'm surprised you find that surprising.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 20, 2013)

ymu said:


> I want to know why you object to Campbell levelling a vile anti-black insult at Lee, when he was clearly referencing Lee's own use of that same vile insult at Jackson.
> 
> It was the use of that insult that outraged my partner. I'm surprised you find that surprising.


 
House nigger doesn't have the sting it did 100 years ago. Just plain 'nigger', your partner has heard before. I expect he's hardened to it by now to an extent.

p.s. My objection is to the derision heaped on Lee from all sides for his stated principles. It's not about any one set of words used.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 20, 2013)

p.s. please tell me that 'bouncing around the room in outrage' was an exaggeration.


----------



## ymu (Jan 20, 2013)

He's never gonna be hardened to terms like 'house negro' any more than he will be to 'coconut' or 'malteser'.


----------



## ymu (Jan 20, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> p.s. please tell me that 'bouncing around the room in outrage' was an exaggeration.


He actually does bounce. 

His anger is very expressive. As is his laughter.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 20, 2013)

ymu said:


> His anger is very expressive. As is his laughter.


 
Blacks are so lively and expressive. Angry one minute, big toothy smiles the next.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Jan 20, 2013)

this is going well i see


----------



## Balbi (Jan 20, 2013)

My Kentuckian housemate went to see it yesterday and laughed most of the way through.


----------



## ymu (Jan 20, 2013)

Yeah, Johnny, That's exactly how I see the man I love. It's how your wife sees you too. We're white you see, can't help it. Racial stereotyping ftw.


----------



## D'wards (Jan 20, 2013)

But who appointed Lee the Hollywood racial equality judge?

Yes, he's entitled to his opinion, but does he have to be such a bitchy arsehole about it.

He acted like a total prick when accusing of dear Clint Eastwood of racism. He levelled his accusation at him, and kept poking ,and when Clint had had enough and responded that Lee should "Shut his face" Lee likened him to a slaveowner, then claimed to be the bigger man by taking the high-road despite starting the spat and keeping it going himself.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2008/jun/09/news.usa

If Lee keeps on like this i think he's going to damage his already flailing career.

He reminds me of the character in the Eddie Murphy film , i think it was Boomerang, who kept trying to find racism all the time, for example Pool is a racist game because the main aim is for the white ball to knock the black ball into the hole, and count the amount of Ks in books, and if they were divisible by 3 would claim the whole thing is a racist conspiracy.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 20, 2013)

He refuses to even watch the film. Bit rich passing judgement when he can't even be arsed to see it.


----------



## Firky (Jan 20, 2013)

Spike Lee's just pissed off and jealous, he hasn't made an excellent film since Do the Right Thing which must be nearly 25 years ago now. Aint dat truth, ruth!


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

D'wards said:


> If Lee keeps on like this i think he's going to damage his already flailing career.
> 
> He reminds me of the character in the Eddie Murphy film , i think it was Boomerang, who kept trying to find racism all the time,


 
That's it: Spike Lee is like a black Chicken Little.  He keeps running around saying that there's racism out there.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

Nanker Phelge said:


> He refuses to even watch the film. Bit rich passing judgement when he can't even be arsed to see it.


 
Maybe he read the Wikipedia entry.

Not going is the whole idea behind a boycott.


----------



## ymu (Jan 21, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> That's it: Spike Lee is like a black Chicken Little. He keeps running around saying that there's racism out there.


 
There's plenty out there. So much, and often so subtle that you can't be sure precisely which incidents genuinely were racially motivated and which were innocent, but there's sure as hell too many for it all to be innocent.

But white people don't see that Johnny. They know it happens, but not how often and they don't see it. They don't get how hurtful it is. The punch in the stomach each and every time you realise that you are being treated as a skin colour rather than a human being. And that this is something that has affected you your whole life and will affect you your whole life, sometimes in irreversibly damaging ways, and you have to laugh because otherwise you wouldn't stop crying.

I get it. I live with the consquences of it for my partner every day. But it's hard for people to see outside their bubble without someome to point out where to look. Trivialising the act of pulling people up on racism is counter-productive. It means they won't listen next time. Don't do that.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

ymu said:


> Trivialising the act of pulling people up on racism is counter-productive.


 
Say what?


----------



## ymu (Jan 21, 2013)

You heard me.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

ymu said:


> You heard me.


 
I read the words. I just didn't understand what they mean. \

I'm assuming you mean that I'm trivializing someone: who? Spike Lee? Tarantino? Uncle Fester [or whatever his name is?]?


----------



## ymu (Jan 21, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Blacks are so lively and expressive. Angry one minute, big toothy smiles the next.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

I wasn't trivializing something. That was a dig at you and your description of your partner.


----------



## ymu (Jan 21, 2013)

And why did you make that dig? Your wife doesn't see you like that. You wouldn't be with her if she did. You seem to have some respect for my partner from your disapproval at the description, so why do you think he would be with me if I did? His face is not particularly expressive (although his smile makes me melt ). I don't have any idea what that would have to do with bouncing. I think he does it to stop himself punching the wall cos it hurts. When he laughs, he literally creases up and falls to the floor. Again, the facials have nothing to do with it.

If you are genuinely associating my original, briefer description with that image of a black man, that's your problem not mine. I suspect it was just a cheap way of having a dig at me cos you're too intellectually lazy to come up with anything better and your ego cannot handle not having the last word. Again, your problem not mine.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

ymu said:


> And why did you make that dig?


Because that's how I was feeling at the time.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

Your description had him 'bouncing around the room in outrage' because one hollywood twat said something disparaging about another hollywood twat.


----------



## ymu (Jan 21, 2013)

Disparaging is a bit mild, no?. An insult based on slavery is guaranteed to get him raging, and it doesn't make it OK when it is used black on black. In some ways it's worse.


----------



## Firky (Jan 21, 2013)

Guess what Dub Version thought of it 



Yes, you're right!


----------



## ymu (Jan 21, 2013)

i can't guess.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 21, 2013)

I saw it on Saturday. Was a bit drunk but I liked it. 
7/10


----------



## 8ball (Jan 21, 2013)

Nanker Phelge said:


> Did anyone else notice James Remar appear in two different roles in the film?


 
I was sure of this but couldn't see the first role (where he is the first guy to get shot in the film) in the credits.

I really enjoyed it - his best since Kill Bill vol 1.  Possibly his best since Jackie Brown (not decided on that yet).


----------



## TitanSound (Jan 21, 2013)

Saw it. Enjoyed it.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 21, 2013)

8ball said:


> I was sure of this but couldn't see the first role (where he is the first guy to get shot in the film) in the credits.


 
He is credited twice....under the Speck Brothers and then again as Butch


----------



## 8ball (Jan 21, 2013)

Nanker Phelge said:


> He is credited twice....under the Speck Brothers and then again as Butch


 
Thanks - I was looking at the credits at the end but people were shuffling about etc.

Did anyone else pick up on a fairly strong anti-capitalist undercurrent?


----------



## ymu (Jan 21, 2013)

8ball said:


> I was sure of this but couldn't see the first role (where he is the first guy to get shot in the film) in the credits.
> 
> I really enjoyed it - his best since Kill Bill vol 1. Possibly his best since Jackie Brown (not decided on that yet).


Did you notice how similar the plot is to _Kill Bill_ (both parts)?



Spoiler: detail



The flashbacks from Kill Bill are the first part of _Django_. The confrontation at Candieland is the wedding (until then, the aim is simply to escape a life of slavery with his family safe and intact). He even gets locked into an impossible situation which he gets out of with the aid of an earlier episode with a mentor (seen in flashback at this point in KB, shown chronologically in Kill Bill).

Stephen is Bill (revenge on a husband/head house-negro); King Schultz is Pai Mei (mentor); Candie and his crew are the various henchmen that The Bride kills off. Candie the snake-eyed woman (cold and manipulative, kills mentor/is the cause of mentor's death). Tarantino is MIchael Madsen, I guess (scruffy broken down henchman, offers the means of escape from an impossible situation).

I'd have preferred a linear _Basterds_, for reasons of correcting the history books; but a linear Kill Bill is pretty cool.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 21, 2013)

ymu said:


> Did you notice how similar the plot is to _Kill Bill_ (both parts)?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Nice, I can see what you've done but I think there are plenty of important differences there.  Both have a lot of recurring themes that you see in Tarantino films, and both are obviously revenge flicks, but there wasn't the total plot-copying like you get in eg. _Borat_ and _Bruno_.


----------



## Reno (Jan 21, 2013)

Kill Bill 1&2, Death Proof, Inglorious Basterds and Django Unchained are all revenge stories, so some narrative overlap shouldn't be surprising. However I find that in how Django filters a dark chapter of history though the prism of 70s, mostly Italian exploitation cinema, makes it more of a companion piece to Basterds.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 21, 2013)

There was always a lot of cross over plot in euro westerns, Samurai and Martial Arts films....many of them are just the same stories told time and time again, so similarities between Kill Bill and DJango Unchained are part of the plot DNA of those genres.....

ETA: What he said ^^^^^^


----------



## ymu (Jan 21, 2013)

Reno said:


> Kill Bill 1&2, Death Proof, Inglorious Basterds and Django Unchained are all revenge stories, so some narrative overlap shouldn't be surprising. However I find that in how Django filters a dark chapter of history though the prism of 70s, mostly Italian exploitation cinema, makes it more of a companion piece to Basterds.


Shaolin exploitation cinema?

I thought the extreme grace and skill of Django with his chosen form of weapon matched The Bride better, although not the other adversaries, of course. That and the lone hero/mentor perspective.


----------



## Reno (Jan 21, 2013)

ymu said:


> Shaolin exploitation cinema?
> 
> I thought the extreme grace and skill of Django with his chosen form of weapon matched The Bride better, although not the other adversaries, of course. That and the lone hero/mentor perspective.


 
It's the way both films are tied to historical atrocities that I find most significant. Kill Bill's carnage is rooted in a private family matter and the aesthetics of Hong Kong martial arts films are quite different to those of 70s Italian films. Kill Bill also was an experiment in that Tarantino wanted to make a pure film, one that was less reliant on long dialogue scenes than all of his other work. I don't see much of a similarity in the perceived grace between Django and The Bride.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 21, 2013)

Spoiler: Question that might be a spoiler



What did people think was the significance of Django taking the saddle off the horse and riding bareback for the final confrontation?


----------



## TitanSound (Jan 21, 2013)

8ball said:


> Spoiler: Question that might be a spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> What did people think was the significance of Django taking the saddle off the horse and riding bareback for the final confrontation?


 
DOH SPOILER TAGS - fixed



Spoiler: Answer?



Because then the horse is "unchained"?


----------



## ymu (Jan 21, 2013)

8ball said:


> Spoiler: Question that might be a spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> What did people think was the significance of Django taking the saddle off the horse and riding bareback for the final confrontation?





Spoiler: answer?



The first significance of saddles was when he took the slaver's old saddle off the first horse he had and replaced it with his own, new saddle. Presumably bought for him by Schultz. Symbolic of Django's transition to free man. Taking off the slaver's saddle, I guess, is symbolic of Django's not being willing to act as proxy slaver, unlike Stephen. Or perhaps symbolic that he doesn't need a saddle any more than he still needs Schultz? Bit weak.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 21, 2013)

Jeez, overanalysis or what.
People notice so much! 
I just enjoyed the ride.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 21, 2013)

Nice answers, I think it might be a combination of those and maybe 



Spoiler



i) the bareback rider with the rifle being a great image ii) Possible reference to original 'Django' series ie. this is where he becomes that character iii) A nod to the native American bareback riders whose notion of 'ownership' was entirely different to that of the white man.


 
Just guessing, though.


----------



## prunus (Jan 21, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> I saw it on Saturday. Was a bit drunk but I liked it.
> 7/10


 
Yes, I'm not surprised.  Being drunk is fun.


----------



## ymu (Jan 21, 2013)

8ball said:


> Nice answers, I think it might be a combination of those and maybe
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I like that. I'm going to consolidate all the answers into:



Spoiler



Just as the new saddle at the beginning symbolised his transition to free man, discarding the old one at the end symbolised his shrugging off the trappings of the white man, the means by which they control other should-be free beings, and his final transition into his own man, not someone else's servant (the beginning of this phase was the change of clothes after the Brittle brothers were dispatched and Schultz offered the partnership deal).


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jan 21, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Maybe he read the Wikipedia entry.
> 
> Not going is the whole idea behind a boycott.


 
I don't think boycotting films is constructive.  I'd guess that most directors are happy to have someone boycott their film.  Controversy is good for the bottom line.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jan 21, 2013)

I finally saw this last weekend. It works well as a shoot the shit out of everything film. If you just want to watch people die, its a great movie.

However, I'm a bit bemused by what "historical" aspects of slavery Tarantino chooses to portray. He puts a huge emphasis on intra-racial violence. I've heard a lot of apologists for slavery bring up the selling of people within Africa and African American slave owners. It makes it somehow less bad if "they're doing it to their own."  I see some of that here.

On the other hand, Spike Lee calling Samuel L. Jackson "Tarrantino's house slave" is racial boundary patrolling.

And possibly the worst thing I can say is the set dressing and costuming sucked.


----------



## Reno (Jan 21, 2013)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> And possibly the worst thing I can say is the set dressing and costuming sucked.


 
In which way did it suck ?


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jan 21, 2013)

Reno said:


> In which way did it suck ?


 
Some of it was decades out of period.  I especially like the china pattern used in the dinner service scene.   I'm pretty sure it was post WWI Japanese.


----------



## Reno (Jan 21, 2013)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> Some of it was decades out of period. I especially like the china pattern used in the dinner service scene. I'm pretty sure it was post WWI Japanese.


 
The film is supposed to be completely inauthentic in its costuming and art direction as it takes 70s Italian B-movies as its design inspiration rather than history. It's gleefully anachronistic and that's one of the things I thought were so fun about it. It's the rare case where a costume got a round of applause at the screening where I saw the film (Django's Little Lord Fauntleroy style pimp outfit).


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 21, 2013)

I'm fairly sure Tarantino never really set out to make something that is historically accurate.....

His films are like fairground attractions. The Wall of Death is not really a wall of death, it's a calculated and entertaining stunt, made to look and feel like something a lot more dangerous and risky than it actually is.

Plate patterns! C'mon!


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jan 21, 2013)

Reno said:


> The film is supposed to be completely inauthentic in its costuming and art direction as it takes 70s Italian B-movies as its design inspiration rather than history. It's gleefully anachronistic and that's one of the things I thought were so fun about it. It's the rare case where a costume got a round of applause at the screening where I saw the film (Django's Little Lord Fauntleroy style pimp outfit).


 
Yes, I'm aware of that.  I find it a bit of an irritant in all his films.  It's the triumph of style over substance.


----------



## Part 2 (Jan 21, 2013)

Which jammy bastards bought some action figures?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2013/jan/21/django-unchained-action-figures-pulled


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 21, 2013)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> It's the triumph of style over substance.


 
Isn't this what Tarantino is most known for doing well?


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jan 21, 2013)

Nanker Phelge said:


> Isn't this what Tarantino is most known for doing well?


 
Yes, and I acknowledged that in the first line of my post.  If you want to watch something die, its a great film.


----------



## Reno (Jan 21, 2013)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> Yes, I'm aware of that. I find it a bit of an irritant in all his films. It's the triumph of style over substance.


 
You can argue that his films don't have substance but sometimes style is substance and making statements about aesthetics or film history or genre is a perfectly valid thing to do in art. He is someone who makes films about films. Like it or lump it, that's what he does, where his passion lies and it's at the heart of everyone of his films. If you reject that then you are rejecting the essence of his films. And if he were to be historically authentic in his design, this film wouldn't make sense, because it tries to get at an emotional truth rather than a historically accurate one..


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jan 21, 2013)

Reno said:


> You can argue that his films don't have substance but sometimes style is substance and making statements about aesthetics or film history or genre is a perfectly valid thing to do in art. He is someone who makes films about films. Like it or lump it, that's what he does, where his passion lies and it's at the heart of everyone of his films. If you reject that then you are rejecting the essence of his films. And if he were to be historically authentic in his design, this film wouldn't make sense, because it tries to get at an emotional truth rather than a historically accurate one..


 
Yes, I understand all that. I just find that style a bit pandering.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> I don't think boycotting films is constructive. I'd guess that most directors are happy to have someone boycott their film. Controversy is good for the bottom line.


 
It might not be; but there are some films that some people don't want to see, on principle.

Maybe the best thing would be to just shut up and not go. That would probably be difficult for Spike Lee to do.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> I saw it on Saturday. Was a bit drunk but I liked it.
> 7/10


 
One thing that never made a lot of sense to me, is going to a movie drunk.


----------



## D'wards (Jan 21, 2013)

Chip Barm said:


> Which jammy bastards bought some action figures?
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2013/jan/21/django-unchained-action-figures-pulled


 I ordered them, but not arrived yet - i very much doubt if they'll honour it now


----------



## ymu (Jan 21, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> It might not be; but there are some films that some people don't want to see, on principle.
> 
> Maybe the best thing would be to just shut up and not go. That would probably be difficult for Spike Lee to do.


 
Yes, he loses the authority to criticise if he won't see it and lays himself open to the usual charges he lays himself open to. And as I've already said, he misses the opportunity to give a more detailed critique when there is plenty of valid criticism once you look beneath the immediate emotional impact.


----------



## Reno (Jan 21, 2013)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> Yes, I understand all that. I just find that style a bit pandering.


 
I suppose he panders to the likes of me and that's why I like his style.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jan 21, 2013)

ymu said:


> Yes, he loses the authority to criticise if he won't see it and lays himself open to the usual charges he lays himself open to. And as I've already said, he misses the opportunity to give a more detailed critique when there is plenty of valid criticism once you look beneath the immediate emotional impact.


 
Yes, it might have been more effective to see the film and point out the issues that a white audience simply may not see.


----------



## ymu (Jan 21, 2013)

Exactly.



Reno said:


> I suppose he panders to the likes of me and that's why I like his style.


 
Watching a Tarantino film as a film buff must be quite rewarding.


----------



## Firky (Jan 21, 2013)

This thread...

I predicted and posted on this forum before Django was released that QT makes everyone film experts.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jan 21, 2013)

firky said:


> This thread...
> 
> I predicted and posted on this forum before Django was released that QT makes everyone film experts.


 
It's the internetz.  Everyone is an expert on everything.


----------



## Firky (Jan 21, 2013)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> It's the internetz. Everyone is an expert on everything.


 
And where everything is racist.


----------



## ymu (Jan 21, 2013)

And there's always some joker trying to stir up shit.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 21, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> One thing that never made a lot of sense to me, is going to a movie drunk.


 
It's a bit like anal sex when drunk.....you enjoy it, but don't alway recall all the ins and outs.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

Nanker Phelge said:


> It's a bit like anal sex when drunk.....you enjoy it, but don't alway recall all the ins and outs.


 
It's like any sex when too drunk. One minute it's the ins and outs. The next minute, you're sawing logs.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

8ball said:


> Did anyone else pick up on a fairly strong anti-capitalist undercurrent?


 
Because it's against slavery?


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 21, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> It's like any sex when too drunk. One minute it's the ins and outs. The next minute, you're sawing logs.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

Reno said:


> You can argue that his films don't have substance but sometimes style is substance .


 
Tarantino's films are great fun; but, like some takeaway food, you enjoy eating it, but two hours later, you're ready for something a little more filling.


----------



## Reno (Jan 21, 2013)

Yawn !


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> Yes, it might have been more effective to see the film and point out the issues that a white audience simply may not see.


 

But: he doesn't want to see it.

Btw, this board is rife with posts by people criticizing books, films, tv shows, events etc that they've never seen.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

Reno said:


> Yawn !


 
We get it: we know you can do hissy fit really well. Got anything else you can show us?


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 21, 2013)

8ball said:


> Did anyone else pick up on a fairly strong anti-capitalist undercurrent?


 
Not sure it was anti-capitalist at all.

Cash for flesh was the main aim of all the characters. Some of this shown as OK and some of this shown as not OK.

Much of the euro-western output was not aligned to the good guys wear white, bad guys wear black ethos of the US westerns.

The morality of euro-westerns was mostly grey veering towards black......with even the heroes chasing the cold hard cash without any sense of morality.

When a Fistful of Dollars was first aired on TV in the US a very dodgy prologue was filmed and shown to explain Eastwood's motives for being in the town which removed his real motives of simply wanting to take the money. A VHS version can be viewed on one of the DVD releases.


----------



## Reno (Jan 21, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> We get it: we know you can do hissy fit really well. Got anything else you can show us?


 
Where are hissy fits being done ?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

In your brain?

I don't know where they happen.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 21, 2013)

Reno said:


> Where are hissy fits being done ?


 
Why did you even reply to that? DUH!


----------



## Reno (Jan 21, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> In your brain?
> 
> I don't know where they happen.


 
Yawn !


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

Reno said:


> Yawn !


 
My kids used to do much the same thing as you're doing.

The diff is, they stopped when they got to be about 12. I think even adolescents can have a dawning realization about how boring their behavior can be.


----------



## Reno (Jan 21, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> My kids used to do much the same thing as you're doing.
> 
> The diff is, they stopped when they got to be about 12. I think even adolescents can have a dawning realization about how boring their behavior can be.


 
I'm just trying to find out why you keep posting these disingenuous smiles after your trolling and point scoring posts and see how it feels.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

Reno said:


> I'm just trying to find out why you keep posting these disingenuous smiles after your trolling and point scoring posts and see how it feels.


 
How's that going for you so far: getting a stiffie yet?


----------



## Reno (Jan 21, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> How's that going for you so far: getting a stiffie yet?


 
Is that what it does for you ? To me it just feels insincere.


----------



## ymu (Jan 21, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> My kids used to do much the same thing as you're doing.
> 
> The diff is, they stopped when they got to be about 12. I think even adolescents can have a dawning realization about how boring their behavior can be.


Stop! The irony is killing me.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

Reno said:


> Is that what it does for you ? To me it just feels insincere.


 
To me, your posts just seem snide and juvenile.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

Take a look back at today's posts. I made a couple of comments about the film in response to various comments.

You come along with 'yawn'.

Why did you do that? What purpose does it serve?


----------



## ymu (Jan 21, 2013)

_Snide and juvenile_. Now, who on this thread does that description fit best? Along with _massive hypocrite_, of course.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 21, 2013)

Nanker Phelge said:


> Not sure it was anti-capitalist at all.
> 
> Cash for flesh was the main aim of all the characters. Some of this shown as OK and some of this shown as not OK.


 
Can't really say why I think this without spoilers and can't really say at the moment with any articulacy due to a few too many beers. 

On a completely unrelated note... 



Spoiler



I was disappointed with the lack of any compelling female characters.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

edit


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 21, 2013)

Blazing Saddles vs Django Unchained
Which is best? Discuss


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> Blazing Saddles vs Django Unchained
> Which is best? Discuss


 
Django is certainly deficient in the fart scene category...


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 21, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Take a look back at today's posts. I made a couple of comments about the film in response to various comments.
> 
> You come along with 'yawn'.
> 
> Why did you do that? What purpose does it serve?


It's a natural reaction to your film 'analysis'


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> It's a natural reaction to your film 'analysis'


 
Whatever. We can discuss the film, or we can trade insults. If it's the latter you prefer, I'm sure I can keep at it for the next week.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 21, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Because it's against slavery?


 
No, not quite that simplistic, and not really to do with the 'flesh for cash' angle either. 

Will come back to it when my command of words has returned somewhat.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 21, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Whatever. We can discuss the film, or we can trade insults. If it's the latter you prefer, I'm sure I can keep at it for the next week.


 
Week off work?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

8ball said:


> Week off work?


 
Week figuratively speaking. It should only require a few minutes each day to think up the requisite insults. There's a wealth of material to work from.


----------



## Reno (Jan 21, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Take a look back at today's posts. I made a couple of comments about the film in response to various comments.
> 
> You come along with 'yawn'.
> 
> Why did you do that? What purpose does it serve?


 
I found what you had to say boring. You just hung a tired cliche on what I was saying, which was utterly redundant and contributed exactly nothing apart from your total lack of interest in engaging with what someone actually says. His films are like fast food ? What Chinese cookie morsel of wisdom is that ? And not at three hours running time they are not.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jan 21, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> But: he doesn't want to see it.
> 
> Btw, this board is rife with posts by people criticizing books, films, tv shows, events etc that they've never seen.


 
He doesn't have to, but he shouldn't be suprised if his opinion gets discounted.   Nor should anyone on this board be suprised if their opinion gets discounted for the same reason.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

Reno said:


> I found what you had to say boring. You just hung a tired cliche on what I was saying, which was utterly redundant and contributed exactly nothing apart from your total lack of interest in engaging with what someone actually says. His films are like fast food ? What Chinese cookie morsel of wisdom is that ? And not at three hours running time they are not.


 
If you'd just posted this in the first place, we would have avoided all this unpleasantness.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> He doesn't have to, but he shouldn't be suprised if his opinion gets discounted. Nor should anyone on this board be suprised if their opinion gets discounted for the same reason.


 
But the principle driving him to avoid the film shouldn't be discounted.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

Reno said:


> I found what you had to say boring. You just hung a tired cliche on what I was saying, which was utterly redundant and contributed exactly nothing apart from your total lack of interest in engaging with what someone actually says. His films are like fast food ? What Chinese cookie morsel of wisdom is that ? And not at three hours running time they are not.


 
As for my analogy, I find most Tarantino films to be enjoyable, but mostly to be without substance. The current film turns the issue of slavery into a cheap entertainment. If one takes it at that level, one might get some enjoyment out of it. If one tries to look deeper - there's nothing to see.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jan 21, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> But the principle driving him to avoid the film shouldn't be discounted.


 
His reasons are entirely understandable.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 21, 2013)

Just as a quick aside, at one point, I think when they were in the house towards the end, there was this ace song playing - anyone recognise it?


----------



## Reno (Jan 21, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> As for my analogy, I find most Tarantino films to be enjoyable, but mostly to be without substance. The current film turns the issue of slavery into a cheap entertainment. If one takes it at that level, one might get some enjoyment out of it. If one tries to look deeper - there's nothing to see.


 
I don't think it's primarily a film about slavery, it's a film about the representation of slavery in "cheap entertainment" (exploitation films). Like Inglorious Basterds it's a film that is more about the representation of history than history itself and the morality of distorting history in fiction and whether that can ever be justified.

That's why I think its style is its content and that's not meant dismissively or to say it's like fast food, that's to say the film deals with valid questions about art, exploitation and entertainment. And it experiments how far you can go in using fiction to retcon real history. You think it's cheap entertainment, but it's actually about the morality of cheap entertainment, which can be cathartic, even if it may be morally dubious.

And it has sparked an awful lot of debate about slavery and the representation of slavery, which is no bad thing. I happen find all of this interesting and worth thinking about, you would rather not.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

Reno said:


> I don't think it's primarily a film about slavery, it's a film about the representation of slavery in "cheap entertainment" (exploitation films). Like Inglorious Basterds it's a film that is more about the representation of history than history itself and the morality of distorting history in fiction and whether that can ever be justified.
> 
> That's why I think its style is its content and that's not meant dismissively or to say it's like fast food, that's to say the film deals with valid questions about art, exploitation and entertainment. And it experiments how far you can go in using fiction to retcon real history. You think it's cheap entertainment, but it's actually about the morality of cheap entertainment, which can be cathartic, even if it may be morally dubious.
> 
> .


 
But aside from shooting a 70s spaghetti western with modern equipment, and beefing up the dialogue to 2012 standards [liberal use of nigger - which would be more true to the period], what is he doing? And how is remaking an old film presenting us with questions about art, exploitation and entertainment?

There's a good argument to be made that what he's doing is simply exploitation.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 21, 2013)

I don't think there is anything wrong with exploitation. It's a funny word really.
Why is it seen as less acceptable to exploit other sources with film than with other forms of expression?


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 21, 2013)

What he is doing is creating pop culture cinema in an unapologtic way. He exploits the history of film.

People may want his films to say more, be more, carry some weight and conscious, but they don't.


----------



## Reno (Jan 21, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> But aside from shooting a 70s spaghetti western with modern equipment, and beefing up the dialogue to 2012 standards [liberal use of nigger - which would be more true to the period], what is he doing? And how is remaking an old film presenting us with questions about art, exploitation and entertainment?
> 
> There's a good argument to be made that what he's doing is simply exploitation.


 
That's what his detractors have accused him of for his entire career, so that's nothing new. Tarantino feels exploitation films can have certain virtues. He presents an audience who are mostly unfamiliar with this type of story telling and approach, with what he thinks was good about these films, like for instance their irreverent approach to history and tabu issues. And then he goes off on all sorts of tangents from there.

I happen to like exploitation cinema myself, so maybe this resonates more for me. And I'm not saying that I don't respond to exploitation on a base level, but that's not the only level some of these films work on for me.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2013)

Reno said:


> That's what his detractors have accused him of for his entire career, so that's nothing new. Tarantino feels exploitation films can have certain virtues. He presents an audience who are mostly unfamiliar with this type of story telling and approach, with what he thinks was good about these films, like for instance their irreverent approach to history and tabu issues. And then he goes off on all sorts of tangents from there.
> 
> I happen to like exploitation cinema myself, so maybe this resonates more for me. And I'm not saying that I don't respond to exploitation on a base level, but that's not the only level some of these films work on for me.


 
They have one big virtue: they make him a potful of money. And they do that because many of us enjoy these two dimensional gorefests. One goes to a Tarantino movie to giggle at the audacity of a character saying nigger 100 times, or to enjoy the accident-witness fascination of watching a man killed with a baseball bat or samurai sword. At a Tarantino film, the audience gets to laugh as three women beat Kurt Russell to death.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 21, 2013)

And what fun it is.
I'm glad Tarantino makes 2d films. I hate 3d.


----------



## Reno (Jan 22, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> They have one big virtue: they make him a potful of money. And they do that because many of us enjoy these two dimensional gorefests. One goes to a Tarantino movie to giggle at the audacity of a character saying nigger 100 times, or to enjoy the accident-witness fascination of watching a man killed with a baseball bat or samurai sword. At a Tarantino film, the audience gets to laugh as three women beat Kurt Russell to death.


 
So he's mainly in it for the money according to you. Then I'm not sure what would keep you discussing Tarantino long after you made your point that his work is superficial and like "fast food". I wouldn't be able to go this long about Michael Bay, who is a thoroughly cynical director who I believe is primarily in it for the money. That just doesn't interest me talking about.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 22, 2013)

Reno said:


> So he's mainly in it for the money according to you. Then I'm not sure what would keep you discussing Tarantino long after you made your point that his work is superficial and like "fast food". I wouldn't be able to go this long about Michael Bay, who is a thoroughly cynical director who I believe is primarily in it for the money. That just doesn't interest me talking about.


 
Huh? It's been what? Maybe a half dozen substantive posts. I keep 'going on', mostly because I'm answering comments by others.

Like, what's happening here, with this post.

Michael Bay? I could go on for a long time about my dislike of the Transformers series, and the CG garbage spinoffs that have resulted.

I have taken one thing of value from Tarantino, though: Chingon. Great music.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 22, 2013)

Reno said:


> So he's mainly in it for the money according to you. Then I'm not sure what would keep you discussing Tarantino long after you made your point that his work is superficial and like "fast food". I wouldn't be able to go this long about Michael Bay, who is a thoroughly cynical director who I believe is primarily in it for the money. That just doesn't interest me talking about.


 
Btw, you're doing it again. Going off topic in order to take a swipe at me personally.

Did you notice how civil it got when the discussion was focused on the film, instead of on the posters?


----------



## Reno (Jan 22, 2013)




----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 22, 2013)

sorry to bring the conversation back to the blood but I really did enjoy the blood in this. Proper old skool blood, like they have attached an exploding blood packet to the recipient of a bullet and set it off when the blokey is shot.


I'm easily pleased


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 22, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> sorry to bring the conversation back to the blood but I really did enjoy the blood in this. Proper old skool blood, like they have attached an exploding blood packet to the recipient of a bullet and set it off when the blokey is shot.
> 
> 
> I'm easily pleased


 
Django reaches the level of Grand Guignol in places.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 22, 2013)

That's the second time you posted that and I still can't tell what it is!??


----------



## Mation (Jan 22, 2013)

Saw this last night. Well started and saw quite a lot of it, but in the end I just had to switch it off. I was feeling physically ill and couldn't look at the screen because of the who, how and why of the violence, rather than the violence itself.

Don't know why I watched it in the first place tbh - my first thought about it was that it had the potential to be dodgy as fuck and that I'd just get upset. Then I read the start of this thread and thought it sounded better than that (so it's all your fault, people!). But no. It wasn't.

Oh god and Samuel L Jackson's character was just _unbearable_. And the dogs. Fuck. I know that stuff happened. I don't need reminding of it in an 'entertaining' way.


----------



## Virtual Blue (Jan 22, 2013)

I loved the _mandingo fight_ _to the death_ scene.
Unsure if Americans knew Judo/ BJJ - as I don't think the kimura (the bit he snapped elbow/shoulder) was known in the West back then.
Then his films are historically inaccurate - and move in all sorts of crazy directions...


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 22, 2013)

Lots of people commenting on the violence here and on Facebook. Even Dubversion got all Mary Whitehouse about it.
Is it really that bad/upsetting?
It didn't seem that extreme to me - certainly no more than a typical Django-style spaghetti western.
Maybe I'm desensitised by watching too many dodgy Italian exploitation films (which ain't that many really).


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 22, 2013)

Lots of reviewers went on about the violence so I was expecting something much worse.

I didn't find it too bad really. Even the Mandingo fight wasn't that graphic really, with the 'winning blow' being off screen.


----------



## mk12 (Jan 22, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> Lots of people commenting on the violence here and on Facebook. Even Dubversion got all Mary Whitehouse about it.
> Is it really that bad/upsetting?
> It didn't seem that extreme to me - certainly no more than a typical Django-style spaghetti western.
> Maybe I'm desensitised by watching too many dodgy Italian exploitation films (which ain't that many really).


 
Certain parts _were_ brutal and distressing, such as the mandingo fight, the whipping and the dogs. But this is what slavery was like. Why would QT downplay these aspects?


----------



## ymu (Jan 22, 2013)

mk12 said:


> Certain parts _were_ brutal and distressing, such as the mandingo fight, the whipping and the dogs. But this is what slavery was like. Why would QT downplay these aspects?


He did downplay them. The original was a lot more gruesome, according to him.

Some accuse the film of being too violent, others say it downplays the violence of slavery. Depends on your perspective. I guess. I covered my eyes at the worst of the mandingo and dog stuff. I can't watch that shit. But I don't object to it being there.

Mandingos are an invention of 70s cinema. Very Tarantino, but it does lay him open to charges of introducing gratuitous violence of a kind that did not happen. I'm not sure anyone trying to argue that slavery wasn't that brutal really would get very far though.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 22, 2013)

ymu said:


> I covered my eyes at the worst of the mandingo and dog stuff.


 
How did you know it was the worst if you covered your eyes?


----------



## ymu (Jan 22, 2013)

By definition. I had to cover my eyes before the scenes concluded.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 22, 2013)

ymu said:


> By definition. I had to cover my eyes before the scenes concluded.


 
My g/f doesn't like screen violence at all, but even when I warned her what might be coming it never really got to levels that she expected.

I think TV shows like Dexter, Boardwalk Empire, Sopranos and Deadwood were all more violent and intense than Django Unchained.

In Deadwood a man had his eye pulled put of his socket!

The dogs scene was unpleasent, but it wasn't actually too graphic. The idea of being torn apart by dogs was far more present than the detail.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 22, 2013)

You're all soft, basically


----------



## ymu (Jan 22, 2013)

Nanker Phelge said:


> My g/f doesn't like screen violence at all, but even when I warned her what might be coming it never really got to levels that she expected.
> 
> I think TV shows like Dexter, Boardwalk Empire, Sopranos and Deadwood were all more violent and intense than Django Unchained.
> 
> ...


I can't even watch American Werewolf in London, ffs! 

The idea is enough. I don't enjoy watching graphic violence. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be in the film, or that I object to it being in the film, or that I think less of the film for including it. It's rare that you see a film-maker portray a rape scene that is horrific rather than titillating. Those are hard to watch too, but still I cheer on the film-maker for making the scene as horrific to the audience as it bloody well should be.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 22, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> That's the second time you posted that and I still can't tell what it is!??


 
You got a better memory than me. 

It's in the scene where everyone goes crazy shooting it up in the house. Django runs into the other room and shoots from behind some sort of overturned wooden cabinet. The walls are streaked red with blood.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 22, 2013)

ah i see it now on a pc. on a phone it looks like an abstract painting


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 22, 2013)

Mation said:


> thought it sounded better than that (so it's all your fault, people!). But no. It wasn't..


 
It's a rollicking good time if you enjoy watching whipping, killing; and like the sound of the word 'nigger'.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 22, 2013)

ymu said:


> Mandingos are an invention of 70s cinema.


 
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/797274.Mandingo


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 22, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> ah i see it now on a pc. on a phone it looks like an abstract painting


 
That's because some of Tarantino's cinematography is beautiful.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 22, 2013)

Hope I didn't post this twice.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 22, 2013)

is that a hamster or a vole there underneath the fella's gun?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 22, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> is that a hamster or a vole there underneath the fella's gun?


 
You on the phone again?

It's a man ducking with his hands over the back of his head.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 22, 2013)

On closer inspection, it looks like an otter:


----------



## ymu (Jan 22, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/797274.Mandingo


Strictly speaking, an invention of an obscure 50s author, yes.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 22, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> On closer inspection, it looks like an otter:


 
You saw the film, right?

You remember any otters in there?

How about a badger?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 22, 2013)

There is a chicken, though.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 22, 2013)

ymu said:


> Strictly speaking, an invention of an obscure 50s author, yes.


 
Strictly speaking, a Anglicization of the name of the Mandinka tribe.


----------



## ymu (Jan 22, 2013)

Did slave-owners buy slaves in order to force them to fight to the death?

No.

Simply enough put for you now JC?


----------



## TopCat (Jan 23, 2013)

Many people probably don't know the USA was founded on genocide and slavery. This film will really open peoples eyes to the awfulness of slavery and how racist the average person was in the South at that time. 

That said I found I had to stop watching the film three quarters of the way through. The cumulative offence of hearing the N word repeated more times that I have ever heard it grated. For me growing up, using the N word was fighting talk and in itself makes me _very_ tense. I can't stop speculating that Tarantino chose the period, set, setting and story because he got off on being able to set up characters to use the N word so many fucking times.


----------



## RaverDrew (Jan 23, 2013)




----------



## ymu (Jan 23, 2013)

TopCat said:


> Many people probably don't know the USA was founded on genocide and slavery. This film will really open peoples eyes to the awfulness of slavery and how racist the average person was in the South at that time.
> 
> That said I found I had to stop watching the film three quarters of the way through. The cumulative offence of hearing the N word repeated more times that I have ever heard it grated. For me growing up, using the N word was fighting talk and in itself makes me _very_ tense. I can't stop speculating that Tarantino chose the period, set, setting and story because he got off on being able to set up characters to use the N word so many fucking times.


 
It wasn't so bad hearing it when you knew the speaker had basically just marked themselves out for death though.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 23, 2013)

RaverDrew said:


>



it's ridiculous innit. people need to get over themselves and be able to say nigger without feeling so guilty and awkward.


----------



## ymu (Jan 23, 2013)

In an appropriate context, of course. It's not OK to use the word as part of your everyday language unless you are black, and even then it is likely to be highly contentious. I know you know that, but it's remarkable how many idiots insist that it is OK these days.

It's easy to understand why Tarantino puts hackles up with his use of it, however justified by the context (and it is just as justified by the context in his other films, IMO). He's just a bit too close to the kind of sneery arseholes who hide behind this excuse to justify quite deliberate bullying.

It is very noticeable that most of the criticism comes from people who refuse to say or spell out the word though. It's not a strong position to be arguing from, IMO.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 23, 2013)

Of course, that's a given, but people are even reluctant to use it in appropriate contexts. they even type 'the n word' on internet forums!


----------



## TopCat (Jan 23, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> Of course, that's a given, but people are even reluctant to use it in appropriate contexts. they even type 'the n word' on internet forums!


Please describe _appropriate_ contexts?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 23, 2013)

TopCat said:


> Please describe _appropriate_ contexts?


the one in the clip above is the first that springs to mind. i am now using the word nigger in an appropriate context. i am not using it to hurt or demean anyone. 
are you saying there is never an appropriate context to use a certain word?


----------



## TopCat (Jan 23, 2013)

ymu said:


> It is very noticeable that most of the criticism comes from people who refuse to say or spell out the word though. It's not a strong position to be arguing from, IMO.


 
People who are comfortable to use the term in my company can expect my ire.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 23, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> the one in the clip above is the first that springs to mind. i am now using the word nigger in an appropriate context. i am not using it to hurt or demean anyone.
> are you saying there is never an appropriate context to use a certain word?


You don't seem to have found an appropriate context.


----------



## Reno (Jan 23, 2013)

If you make a word taboo, then you are imbuing it with an amount of power that it shouldn't have.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 23, 2013)

ymu said:


> Did slave-owners buy slaves in order to force them to fight to the death?
> 
> No.
> 
> Simply enough put for you now JC?


 
I don't know, and neither do you.

I suspect that if the slave owner could get a big enough gate admission from selling seats to the event, or make money via bets on the fight such that the cost of the slave plus a profit was made, then yes, they'd let a slave fight to the death.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 23, 2013)

TopCat said:


> Many people probably don't know the USA was founded on genocide and slavery. This film will really open peoples eyes to the awfulness of slavery and how racist the average person was in the South at that time.


 
If people need Django to educate them to the existence of slavery in the US, then we're in a very sorry state indeed.


----------



## ymu (Jan 23, 2013)

TopCat said:


> People who are comfortable to use the term in my company can expect my ire.


And people who can't bring themselves to say it during a conversation such as this one are a bit strange, IMO.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 23, 2013)

TopCat said:


> You don't seem to have found an appropriate context.


Explain what an appropriate context is 
Surely it is fine to report what others have said and fine to discuss in a context about its use?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 23, 2013)

Reno said:


> If you make a word taboo, then you are imbuing it with an amount of power that it shouldn't have.


 
It's tough to make words taboo, even words like squarehead, deutschbelcher, mangiapatate etc


----------



## D'wards (Jan 23, 2013)

Double post madness


----------



## D'wards (Jan 23, 2013)

Chris Rock's take on it


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 23, 2013)

Not one any white person has any business espousing, mind


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> Not one any white person has any business *espousing*, mind


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 23, 2013)

I think there's no real equivalent to nigger for white americans or britons.

I think to get the same effect, you have to look at more specialized words that can be applied directly to particular white people [or others too]: dolescum, whore, retard, midget, etc.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 23, 2013)

If those words came out of a white person's mouth, they'd be undersrood as racist


----------



## TopCat (Jan 23, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> Surely it is fine to report what others have said and fine to discuss in a context about its use?


Would you do this say down the pub?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> I think there's no real equivalent to nigger for white americans or britons.
> 
> I think to get the same effect, you have to look at more specialized words that can be applied directly to particular white people [or others too]: dolescum, whore, retard, midget, etc.


it's well time that 'lawyer' and 'notary' became terms of abuse on the same level as 'whore', 'tart' or 'strumpet': after all, lawyers prostitute the truth.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 23, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> If people need Django to educate them to the existence of slavery in the US, then we're in a very sorry state indeed.


I would wager a significant % of under 20 year olds don't even know slavery existed in any meaningful sense.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2013)

TopCat said:


> Would you do this say down the pub?


two letters, second 'o'


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 23, 2013)

TopCat said:


> Would you do this say down the pub?


Probably not, because of the potential for someone to overhear the wrong part of the conversation.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> two letters, second 'o'





Orang Utan said:


> Probably not, because of the potential for someone to overhear the wrong part of the conversation.


i was right again


----------



## TopCat (Jan 23, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> two letters, second 'o'


I would say Orangutan would not discuss in those terms this film down the pub. Almost certainly because he is a decent bloke and would not want to offend.

Edited to add, he confirmed it a nano second before I posted this.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 23, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> it's well time that 'lawyer' and 'notary' became terms of abuse on the same level as 'whore', 'tart' or 'strumpet': after all, lawyers prostitute the truth.


 
How would you know, apart from watching Rumpole of the Bailey?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2013)

TopCat said:


> I would say Orangutan would not discuss in those terms this film down the pub. Almost certainly because he is a decent bloke and would not want to offend.


there's quite a few things not discussed down pubs because of people's courtesy to others.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 23, 2013)

edit


----------



## TopCat (Jan 23, 2013)

I do feel that some people down the pub will use discussion of this film to behave like utter cunts.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> How would you know, apart from watching Rumpole of the Bailey?


from observation

next


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 23, 2013)

TopCat said:


> I would say Orangutan would not discuss in those terms this film down the pub. Almost certainly because he is a decent bloke and would not want to offend.
> 
> Edited to add, he confirmed it a nano second before I posted this.


I'm not sure, then, what your point is?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 23, 2013)

TopCat said:


> I would wager a significant % of under 20 year olds don't even know slavery existed in any meaningful sense.


 
Damn straight.

About 25% of them are under 5 years old for a start.


----------



## Reno (Jan 23, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> there's quite a few things not discussed down pubs because of people's courtesy to others.


 
I probably wouldn't discuss fisting in a straight pub, even though its not an insult.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 23, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> from observation
> 
> next


 
And what does your non sequitur have to do with a discussion of the power of words like nigger, and whether or not there is any equivalent that's as hurtful to white americans or britons?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> And what does your non sequitur have to do with a discussion of the power of words like nigger, and whether or not there is any equivalent that's as hurtful to white americans or britons?


my musings were prompted by your post about whores.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 23, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> my musings were prompted by your post about whores.


 
I didn't make a post about whores. I made a post about words that might  have a similar negative effect if someone used the word on a white person.

I was trying to explain how it feels to have someone yell 'nigger' at you. Best I could come up with, is how it must feel to have 'dolescum' 'whore' etc, yelled at you.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 23, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> And what does your non sequitur have to do with a discussion of the power of words like nigger, and whether or not there is any equivalent that's as hurtful to white americans or britons?


The only person participating in that 'discussion' is you


----------



## ymu (Jan 23, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> I think there's no real equivalent to nigger for white americans or britons.
> 
> I think to get the same effect, you have to look at more specialized words that can be applied directly to particular white people [or others too]: dolescum, whore, retard, midget, etc.


Yes. Chris Rock uses it in precisely the same way 'chav' is used, to 'other' the poorest members of the working-class.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> I didn't make a post about whores. I made a post about words that might have a similar negative effect if someone used the word on a white person.
> 
> I was trying to explain how it feels to have someone yell 'nigger' at you. Best I could come up with, is how it must feel to have 'dolescum' 'whore' etc, yelled at you.


frankly calling me a whore or a midget wouldn't have any fucking effect on me. i noted that the words you brought up were to do with people's height, people's job, or intelligence: i could quite as well, and indeed with more accuracy, describe a pigmy prostitute as a midget whore, than to address those words to a white people (or black person for that matter) and obtain any other reaction than bemusement. i appreciate that using the 'n' word as an insult carries more baggage. given the relations of power, and the respective colours, of the majority of the enslavers and the majority of the enslaved, it is no surprise that an insult of the force of nigger only goes one way and that there is no reverse insult.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 23, 2013)

ymu said:


> Yes. Chris Rock uses it in precisely the same way 'chav' is used, to 'other' the poorest members of the working-class.


Yeah spot on. Never did like that routine.
It's just perpetuating racist assumptions about 'bad niggers' and 'good black folk'.
Doesn't help matters much


----------



## 8ball (Jan 23, 2013)

ymu said:


> Yes. Chris Rock uses it in precisely the same way 'chav' is used, to 'other' the poorest members of the working-class.


 
Makes me think of that Lennon/Ono song 'Woman Is The Nigger Of The World'.

I always imagine a couple of billion black women hearing it and thinking, 'cheers, then'.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 23, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> The only person participating in that 'discussion' is you


 
It's alright for people to go on endlessly about 'nigger', but not for me to consider if it's possible to apply a word that can be as hurtful to a white person?

There seems to be a certain amount of enjoyment involved in throwing the word nigger around, here. Does it make you uncomfortable to consider that maybe, someone could hurt you with a word, in the way that that word hurts us?


----------



## ymu (Jan 23, 2013)

TopCat said:


> I do feel that some people down the pub will use discussion of this film to behave like utter cunts.


Precisely the context I might use the word in to call them out on it. I wouldn't necessarily repeat the word, but it would depend on how the conversation went. I certainly wouldn't make myself look like a cunt by referring to it as 'the n-word' instead.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 23, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> Yeah spot on. Never did like that routine.
> It's just perpetuating racist assumptions about 'bad niggers' and 'good black folk'.
> Doesn't help matters much


 
Chav and nigger are equivalent?

I doubt it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2013)

ymu said:


> Precisely the context I might use the word in to call them out on it. I wouldn't necessarily repeat the word, but it would depend on how the conversation went. I certainly wouldn't make myself look like a cunt by referring to it as 'the n-word' instead.


so how do you square the circle of not saying the word but wanting to refer to it?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 23, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> frankly calling me a whore or a midget wouldn't have any fucking effect on me..


 
How about dolescum?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 23, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> It's alright for people to go on endlessly about 'nigger', but not for me to consider if it's possible to apply a word that can be as hurtful to a white person?
> 
> There seems to be a certain amount of enjoyment involved in throwing the word nigger around, here. Does it make you uncomfortable to consider that maybe, someone could hurt you with a word, in the way that that word hurts us?


Yes. I don't think anyone is claiming there is an equivalent though. No one has claimed that and your last few posts seem to be striving to counter such an invisible argument


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> How about dolescum?


you're making yourself look stupid now.


----------



## ymu (Jan 23, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> so how do you square the circle of not saying the word but wanting to refer to it?


I didn't say I wouldn't say it. No circle to square.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 23, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> . i noted that the words you brought up were to do with people's height, people's job, or intelligence:.


 
That's because there is no generic racial word used against white people, that has the negative power of  'nigger'. As I said, the only similarly hurtful words, are specific to the person being insulted.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2013)

hmm


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 23, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Chav and nigger are equivalent?
> 
> I doubt it.


No, just Rock's use of it in that routine. He is being snobbish to other black people in the same way that comics in the UK sneer at chavs


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 23, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> you're making yourself look stupid now.


 
Go to the mirror, boy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> That's because *there is no generic racial word used against white people, that has the negative power of 'nigger'*. As I said, the only similarly hurtful words, are specific to the person being insulted.


i've already pointed this out

could you please not repeat back to me what i have already said?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Go to the mirror, boy.


boy?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 23, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> That's because there is no generic racial word used against white people, that has the negative power of  'nigger'. As I said, the only similarly hurtful words, are specific to the person being insulted.


Indeed.
This is acknowledged.
So let's move on


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> Indeed.
> This is acknowledged.
> So let's move on


you missed out 'let's draw a line under this'


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 23, 2013)

It's a reference to this musical thing that The Who did.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 23, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> Indeed.
> This is acknowledged.
> So let's move on


 
Move on to what, another ten pages about 'nigger'?


----------



## ymu (Jan 23, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> It's alright for people to go on endlessly about 'nigger', but not for me to consider if it's possible to apply a word that can be as hurtful to a white person?


There never can be. The hurt comes from the weight of history and the effect of racism on the lives of individuals, not the contempt being expressed. My partner's cousins live in Barbados. When they're visiting, they shrug off anti-black racism as easily as I shrug off anti-white racism. It's an incident, not a soul-destroying pattern, nor anything that will impact on their lives beyond the moment.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 23, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Move on to what, another ten pages about 'nigger'?


I dunno. Something more interesting than a pointless discussion of non-existent insults for white people. If you're the one with the power, insults are water off a duck's back. If you're the one without power, words can be used to demean you. 
Sorry, can't be arsed to put that into more elegant terms.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 23, 2013)

See, ymu said it much more eloquently than me


----------



## 8ball (Jan 23, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> That's because there is no generic racial word used against white people, that has the negative power of 'nigger'. As I said, the only similarly hurtful words, are specific to the person being insulted.


 
I would think a great many black people on the planet will have never even heard the word.  Not doubting the power that gets tied up in a word, but it's specifically most hurtful to a particular group of black people from a particular time and place.  Different choice of racial slurs in South Africa, for example.  Until pretty recently it was a lot further down the list of most used hurtful racial slurs in the UK, even.  I think I was in my teens before I heard it, local preferences being for words like 'wog' and 'coon'.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 23, 2013)

There's nowhere near as much racism here as there. Black people here haven't been beaten down on a daily basis as much, at least not in recent years.

I would still be hurt and angry if I came to London to receive monkey chants in a corner store, no matter how strong my constitution. I expect it's the same for your Barbados relatives.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 23, 2013)

ymu said:


> Precisely the context I might use the word in to call them out on it. I wouldn't necessarily repeat the word, but it would depend on how the conversation went. I certainly wouldn't make myself look like a cunt by referring to it as 'the n-word' instead.


You think I make myself look like a _cunt_ for using the term N word?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 23, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> If you're the one with the power, insults are water off a duck's back. If you're the one without power, words can be used to demean you.
> Sorry, can't be arsed to put that into more elegant terms.


 
Pretty eloquent, I'd say.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> There's nowhere near as much racism here as there. Black people here haven't been beaten down on a daily basis as much, at least not in recent years.
> 
> I would still be hurt and angry if I came to London to receive monkey chants in a corner store, no matter how strong my constitution. I expect it's the same for your Barbados relatives.


corner stores famously and stereotypically owned by indians or pakistanis. have you much experience of racism from indians or pakistanis?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 23, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> See, ymu said it much more eloquently than me


 
Many people like these 'nigger' discussions because it allows them to say a naughty word, but in the context of an 'intellectual' discussion. It's like little kids sneaking a drink from the liquor cabinet when the parents are out. It's a giggle.

You're one person I'd expect better from.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 23, 2013)

TopCat said:


> You think I make myself look like a _cunt_ for using the term N word?


 
Like a c-word, thank you very much.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Move on to what, another ten pages about 'nigger'?


maybe


----------



## TopCat (Jan 23, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> I dunno. Something more interesting than a pointless discussion of non-existent insults for white people. If you're the one with the power, insults are water off a duck's back. If you're the one without power, words can be used to demean you.
> Sorry, can't be arsed to put that into more elegant terms.


That was tres elegant.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 23, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Many people like these 'nigger' discussions because it allows them to say a naughty word, but in the context of an 'intellectual' discussion. It's like little kids sneaking a drink from the liquor cabinet when the parents are out. It's a giggle.
> 
> You're one person I'd expect better from.


I hope you are not accusing me of that!


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 23, 2013)

TopCat said:


> You think I make myself look like a _cunt_ for using the term N word?


I wouldn't think that, but I would feel for your posture while you were squirming. It can't be very comfortable in that chair.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 23, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> I hope you are not accusing me of that!


 
No, I don't think you do that.

What's bothering me? It's hard to explain.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 23, 2013)

You seem to be arguing with the sky here Johnny! I don't think there's any particular disagreement with what you've said in the last few posts


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> You seem to be arguing with the sky here Johnny! I don't think there's any particular disagreement with what you've said in the last few posts


but it no longer has the novelty it did when the points were initially made.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 23, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> What's bothering me? It's hard to explain.


 
I can understand that you'd bristle when hearing white people using the word casually in an 'intellectual' discussion - I get the same when hearing people discuss golliwog dolls.  Might be way off the mark there...


----------



## ymu (Jan 23, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> There's nowhere near as much racism here as there. Black people here haven't been beaten down on a daily basis as much, at least not in recent years.
> 
> I would still be hurt and angry if I came to London to receive monkey chants in a corner store, no matter how strong my constitution. I expect it's the same for your Barbados relatives.


The difference is that they grew up in a majority black culture where anti-black racism has never and will never affect their life chances. Canada may be a paradise of racial harmony compared to the UK, but your own posts on racism belie the idea that you might be as oblivious to its impact as they are.

They literally yawn when we talk about it. They don't see what the big deal is. Get over it, ignore them *shrug*. All the same things many white people say because they just don't get it and haven't bothered trying.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 23, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> I wouldn't think that, but I would feel for your posture while you were squirming. It can't be very comfortable in that chair.


I can't remember finding myself in this situation irl, but I'd say 'n-word' or something similar. It's for the same reason why people uncomfortable about discussing sex might say 'f-word'. It's right to feel uncomfortable saying it and to want to refer to it obliquely instead. It's horrible - its meaning is horrible, it's a word whose very existence is horrible - and just the act of saying it would make me feel horrible. I see nothing wrong with that.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 23, 2013)

I would take issue with the notion that living in a majority black culture means that racism will not have any effect on your life chances!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2013)

ymu said:


> The difference is that they grew up in a majority black culture where anti-black racism has never and will never affect their life chances.


oh dear

oh dear oh dear

let's take haiti, for example. can you see how anti-black racism has impacted on the life chances of haitians?


----------



## ymu (Jan 23, 2013)

TopCat said:


> You think I make myself look like a _cunt_ for using the term N word?


Not for using it, no. For getting precious about others using the actual word that you are indicating, yes. If you have a legitimate reason to use the term "n-word", I have a legitimate reason for using the word "nigger" to respond to you, in that context.

It's like the tabloids printing "c***" when the broadsheets print "cunt". Infantilising and prissy, and passing responsibility to someone else to identify the word you have referred to as clearly as if you'd just said it.

See the Samuel L Jackson video posted earlier. He says it far better than I can.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 23, 2013)

ymu said:


> Not for using it, no. For getting precious about others using the actual word that you are indicating, yes. If you have a legitimate reason to use the term "n-word", I have a legitimate reason for using the word "nigger" to respond to you, in that context.
> .


What do you mean by 'precious'?


----------



## ymu (Jan 23, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> I would take issue with the notion that living in a majority black culture means that racism will not have any effect on your life chances!


They're middle-class.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 23, 2013)

There's a spot on Louis CK routine about the n word. He contends that it is possibly more offensive cos by saying it you are making the other person say the word themselves in their head. You're passing the buck.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What do you mean by 'precious'?








my preciousss


----------



## ymu (Jan 23, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What do you mean by 'precious'?


Refusing to say the word under any circumstances. See Samuel L video.


----------



## ymu (Jan 23, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> There's a spot on Louis CK routine about the n word. He contends that it is possibly more offensive cos by saying it you are making the other person say the word themselves in their head. You're passing the buck.


I've been trying to find that! believe this is it:



And not having seen it before, only mentioned, he doesn't quite pull that off, IMO. Using 'faggot' as an insult? And specifically a female newsreader so he can call her a cunt (misogynist in the US).

Point valid but he can fuck right off. That is just a routine looking for an excuse to use offensive words in deliberately offensive ways, IMO.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 23, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> There's a spot on Louis CK routine about the n word. He contends that it is possibly more offensive cos by saying it you are making the other person say the word themselves in their head. You're passing the buck.


I don't buy that. If you say 'nigger', they say it in their head anyway in the act of perceiving it. If you say 'n-word', they very well might not - if they're familiar with that way of referring to it, there's no particular reason to.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't buy that. If you say 'nigger', they say it in their head anyway in the act of perceiving it. If you say 'n-word', they very well might not - if they're familiar with that way of referring to it, there's no particular reason to.


you don't have to buy it, it's available for free as ymu demonstrates in post 526


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 23, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't buy that. If you say 'nigger', they say it in their head anyway in the act of perceiving it. If you say 'n-word', they very well might not - if they're familiar with that way of referring to it, there's no particular reason to.


I just think it draws attention to it even more, makes it more powerful and makes you look like a child.


----------



## ymu (Jan 23, 2013)

For clarity: I think it's fine to use the n-word to avoid offending people unnecessarily. I don't think it's fine to make a song and dance about it.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 23, 2013)

ymu said:


> They literally yawn when we talk about it. They don't see what the big deal is. Get over it, ignore them *shrug*. All the same things many white people say because they just don't get it and haven't bothered trying.


 
All that is then, is naievete. If a black person responds in the wrong way to some of these racists who yell insults on the street, it can end in a beating or worse for the black person.

Thinking that the racism around you is no big deal just because your from elsewhere, can be dangerous. To the mouthbreather doing the insulting, he doesn't care if you're from UK or Barbados. All he's seeing, is another nigger.


----------



## Mation (Jan 24, 2013)

ymu said:


> I certainly wouldn't make myself look like a cunt by referring to it as 'the n-word' instead.


I really don't think saying "the n-word" makes anyone look like a cunt.


----------



## ymu (Jan 24, 2013)

Mation said:


> I really don't think saying "the n-word" makes anyone look like a cunt.


Precisely what I haven't said.


ymu said:


> Not for using it, no. For getting precious about others using the actual word that you are indicating, yes. If you have a legitimate reason to use the term "n-word", I have a legitimate reason for using the word "nigger" to respond to you, in that context.
> 
> It's like the tabloids printing "c***" when the broadsheets print "cunt". Infantilising and prissy, and passing responsibility to someone else to identify the word you have referred to as clearly as if you'd just said it.
> 
> See the Samuel L Jackson video posted earlier. He says it far better than I can.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 24, 2013)

ymu said:


> Precisely what I haven't said.


I think you are daft.


----------



## Mation (Jan 24, 2013)

ymu said:


> Precisely what I haven't said.





ymu said:


> Precisely the context I might use the word in to call them out on it. I wouldn't necessarily repeat the word, but it would depend on how the conversation went. *I certainly wouldn't make myself look like a cunt by referring to it as 'the n-word' instead.*


I emboldened it.


----------



## ymu (Jan 24, 2013)

Mation said:


> I emboldened it.


That is in the specific context where I am calling someone out for using the word itself. I'd want them to be listening to what I had to say, not dismissing me as some kind of politically correct prude. It just offers them a way to ignore the actual point. IMO, obv.


----------



## Mation (Jan 25, 2013)

Ok


----------



## TopCat (Jan 25, 2013)

ymu said:


> That is in the specific context where I am calling someone out for using the word itself. I'd want them to be listening to what I had to say, not dismissing me as some kind of politically correct prude. It just offers them a way to ignore the actual point. IMO, obv.


It was just a straw man to enable your rudeness.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 25, 2013)

Watched 90 minutes of this tonight, rest tomorrow.

Very good.  Jamie Lee Curtis and Hans Gruber go after an ex-cop then a forger.

So far, it's been nice watching Leo, Jamie and Sam trying to out-act each other whilst Waltz plays everyone off the screen in the same way as I've seen Depp do, almost like he's just a passenger/bystander but they take the whole thing (so far).   Very funny, as well.


----------



## ymu (Jan 25, 2013)

DexterTCN said:


> Watched 90 minutes of this tonight, rest tomorrow.
> 
> Very good. Jamie Lee Curtis and Hans Gruber go after an ex-cop then a forger.
> 
> So far, it's been nice watching Leo, Jamie and Sam trying to out-act each other whilst Waltz plays everyone off the screen in the same way as I've seen Depp do, almost like he's just a passenger/bystander but they take the whole thing (so far). Very funny, as well.


Wrong thread? DexterTCN


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 25, 2013)

Is it?


----------



## Reno (Jan 25, 2013)

DexterTCN said:


> Very good. Jamie Lee Curtis and Hans Gruber go after an ex-cop then a forger.


----------



## ymu (Jan 25, 2013)

My inadequate film-buffery is clearly letting me down.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 25, 2013)

ymu said:


> My inadequate film-buffery is clearly letting me down.


jamie (obviously), hans gruber (german baddy from die hard), ex-cop (don johnson, miami vice) forger (leo, catch me if you can)

Sorry ymu heh.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 25, 2013)

I was only doing it coz Tarantino is always referencing shit.

Really enjoying it so far though.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 26, 2013)

hopefully going to see the film tomorrow having avoided all write ups - looking forward to being able to read this thread as much as anything


----------



## stuff_it (Jan 26, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> Lots of people commenting on the violence here and on Facebook. Even Dubversion got all Mary Whitehouse about it.
> Is it really that bad/upsetting?
> It didn't seem that extreme to me - certainly no more than a typical Django-style spaghetti western.
> Maybe I'm desensitised by watching too many dodgy Italian exploitation films (which ain't that many really).


It's a Tarrantino film. If there was no violence people would complain like fuck as well.



Johnny Canuck3 said:


> It's a rollicking good time if you enjoy watching whipping, killing; and like the sound of the word 'nigger'.


It's a set up for the final fight scene though, just like any drama is a set up for the finale. They want you to be going like 'yeah merk that fucker, don't care how tenuously involved they were with that shit' by the end.


----------



## starfish (Jan 26, 2013)

Have just downloaded it. Will watch it tomorrow. 19 pages, sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet, what are you people like? Its just a film, get over yourselves. Haha. As if that will ever happen.


----------



## stuff_it (Jan 26, 2013)

starfish said:


> Have just downloaded it. Will watch it tomorrow. 19 pages, sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet, what are you people like? Its just a film, get over yourselves. Haha. As if that will ever happen.


Wait, is that burn?


----------



## Dandred (Jan 26, 2013)

Great film, crap thread.

Loved all the asides to Blazing Saddles in it.


----------



## thriller (Jan 26, 2013)

Dandred said:


> Great film, crap thread.


 
I already pointed this out in page # 9



thriller said:


> shit thread. more talk on history and pronouunciation than discussion on the film itself.


----------



## Dandred (Jan 26, 2013)

thriller said:


> I already pointed this out in page # 9


 
Why would anyone read past the first time the nigger word got mentioned? Always an urban thread of shite. Same thing over and over since 2003


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 26, 2013)

Finished it tonight, a very good Tarantino.     It's very like Kill Bill.   That's not a bad thing.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 26, 2013)

Dandred said:


> Why would anyone read past the first time the nigger word got mentioned? Always an urban thread of shite. Same thing over and over since 2003


Why do you think it is a crap thread? It's been a very interesting thread IMO


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 26, 2013)

Waltz plays King Shultz. The grave they bury Beatrix in, in Kill Bill 2, Paula Shultz. My daughter just told me.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 26, 2013)

He does that a lot. There are people in True Romance mentioned in Reservoir Dogs IIRC


----------



## ymu (Jan 26, 2013)

Schultz itself will have a deeper reference.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 26, 2013)

Snoopy?


----------



## ymu (Jan 26, 2013)

Here ya go.



> Paula Schultz . Chapter No. 7 is entitled "The Lonely Grave of Paula Schultz" (which is supposedly an allusion to a movie "The Wicked Dreams of Paula Schultz" from 1968).
> 
> http://www.funtrivia.com/en/Movies/Kill-Bill-Vol-2-12623.html


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 26, 2013)

*Django Kill...If You Live...Shoot! (1967)*


Directed by Giulio Questi

The main character only known as "The Stranger" (Tomas Milian) is buried alive but manages to dig himself out. The scene is almost take for take reenacted in Kill Bill Vol 2 when Beatrix escpes from the grave of Paula Schultz.
http://wiki.tarantino.info/index.php/Kill_Bill_References_Guide/westerns
Although someone has probably already said this


----------



## dessiato (Jan 26, 2013)

Finally got to watch it tonight. Loved it, classic QT. Liked some of the references to some of his earlier films. Thought it was a bit long and almost got lost from time to time, but, overall, a great movie.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 26, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> Lots of people commenting on the violence here and on Facebook. Even Dubversion got all Mary Whitehouse about it.
> Is it really that bad/upsetting?
> It didn't seem that extreme to me - certainly no more than a typical Django-style spaghetti western.
> Maybe I'm desensitised by watching too many dodgy Italian exploitation films (which ain't that many really).


just got back from the cinema. I was a bit disappointed in the violence aspect. Django and Django Kill especially have a lot of violence and it feels heavy, and having heard that Unchained was in a similar vein I went in braced for some brooding violence.

But no, this is a Tarantino film, and the vast majority of the film is pantomime action, played lightly and often for laughs, meaning that the key shock scenes such as the mandingo fight or the dog scene left me completely unmoved. Its not a case of being desensitised, overall it was just presented in a such a shallow comic book way.

The one time I thought the film got down to it was the long dinner scene at CandieLand. It was pure theatre and the audience in the cinema seemed spellbound despite the long scene and dialogue. Here for once there was some gravity, but all the tension was blown away by the first blood bath, which somewhat bizarrely felt like light relief.

Its a Tarantino movie, but I was really hoping for a Django movie.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 26, 2013)

dessiato said:


> ... classic QT....


I think that's it.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 26, 2013)

DexterTCN said:


> Waltz plays King Shultz. The grave they bury Beatrix in, in Kill Bill 2, Paula Shultz. My daughter just told me.


 
An aside, but loosely connected, in the graveyard in My Name is Nobody is a tombstone with reads 'Sam Peckinpah'.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 26, 2013)

Nanker Phelge said:


> An aside, but loosely connected, in the graveyard in My Name is Nobody is a tombstone with reads 'Sam Peckinpah'.


As a further aside...

*The Simpsons (CARTOON/TV)*



 

 



Shooting through the cereal is a reference to the episode of the Simpsons called "Simpsoncalifragilisticexpiala-D'oh-cious," which features an episode of Itchy and Scratchy called Resevoir Cats (a parody of Resevoir Dogs), guest directed by Quentin Tarantino. In the cartoon, Tarantino turns up and says something like, "What I'm trying to say with this cartoon is that violence is everywhere. It's, like, even in our breakfast cereal, man."


----------



## ska invita (Jan 26, 2013)

has anyone seen Posse? curious about this film





By the way, a good new-ish (2007) Western done with gravity was The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. I really enjoyed this




Amongst the good things about it you forget its Brad Pit


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 26, 2013)

DexterTCN said:


> As a further aside...
> 
> *The Simpsons (CARTOON/TV)*
> 
> ...


 
A simpsons reference in a film: ah, the profundity of it all!


----------



## frogwoman (Jan 27, 2013)

I enjoyed it a very good film but i think it would have been better if the german guy had been black (although i guess in thisf film he had to be nice bout the germans) because as i beleive johnny has said it does give off the idea of a white mentor teaching the black guy how to do things and the white man as liberator which is inappropriate for a film about slavery.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jan 27, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> I enjoyed it a very good film but i think it would have been better if the german guy had been black (although i guess in thisf film he had to be nice bout the germans) because as i beleive johnny has said it does give off the idea of a white mentor teaching the black guy how to do things and the white man as liberator which is inappropriate for a film about slavery.


 
That's enough to put me off going to see it.


----------



## frogwoman (Jan 27, 2013)

Idris2002 said:


> That's enough to put me off going to see it.


 
I dont think tarantino intended this when he made the film though. I think it was just an oversight because the ret of the film seems to go against that message.


----------



## Reno (Jan 27, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> I enjoyed it a very good film but i think it would have been better if the german guy had been black (although i guess in thisf film he had to be nice bout the germans) because as i beleive johnny has said it does give off the idea of a white mentor teaching the black guy how to do things and the white man as liberator which is inappropriate for a film about slavery.


Schultz trains Django as a bounty hunter, so he become his business partner rather than stay a slave. To gain the status of a free slave, Django needs the help and paper work of a white guy, so with a black guy in that role the plot wouldn't have worked.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 27, 2013)

Reno said:


> Schultz trains Django as a bounty hunter, so he become his business partner rather than stay a slave. To gain the status of a free slave, Django needs the help and paper work of a white guy, so with a black guy in that role the plot wouldn't have worked.


 
That President Nixon has a lot to answer for!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 27, 2013)

Idris2002 said:


> That's enough to put me off going to see it.


Don't be daft, it's nothing like that.


----------



## ymu (Jan 27, 2013)

Not on a conscious level, it's not. It's an accurate reflection of the mainstream view of slave history and emancipation. Well-meaning white people rather than slave revolt at the heart of the story.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Jan 28, 2013)

Just saw it last night

found it very enjoyable.   

some slight oddities.  the two climaxes  felt  a bit  off.  the movie  just sorta treads water for a bit.

i fucking love christoph waltz. i get why the politics might feel a bit off  but  he plays a mean obi-wan to django's luke.  i  don't think he could be replaced  without damaging the movie

the are really interesting scenes  showing djangos evolution as a character.   notably  the  bit   where  shultz  berates him for  acting over the top  and  losing focus of the mission and dajango coldly tells him  it's  the other way round.  


Spoiler: handshake



Which is payed off it the handshake scene.   shultz could have walked away  mission complete.   it would have been better for every body if he had.  they could have come back later  when Brünnhilde was safe.  but shultz went off mission.


----------



## D'wards (Jan 28, 2013)

If Schultz had been black it would have been a totally different film Would not have worked in this way.

Plus it is not "the" white man as liberator, but "a" white man. Shades of grey innit


----------



## stuff_it (Jan 28, 2013)

D'wards said:


> If Schultz had been black it would have been a totally different film Would not have worked in this way.
> 
> Plus it is not "the" white man as liberator, but "a" white man. Shades of grey innit


I agree that a lot of the film wouldn't have worked, as there were several plot points that wouldn't have worked if they couldn't take advantage of the fact one of them was white and one black.


----------



## belboid (Jan 28, 2013)

Saw this last night, and after a bit of pendering, I think its probably his best film since Jackie Brown. It is, of course, too long, but they all are apart from Reservoir Dogs (even PF could probably do with losing a couple of minutes), and it, of course, has a QT role that realy should have been given to someone else (someone who wouldn't have distracted the entire audience by doing a bizarre, crap, aussie accent), but those things aside.  It made some telling points about race, the origins of the USA, and had the sharpest politics I've seen in any Tarantino film. As well as the trademark bits of cracking dialogue and stunning set pieces.

Looking forward to seeing it agan already.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 30, 2013)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> i fucking love christoph waltz. i get why the politics might feel a bit off but he plays a mean obi-wan to django's luke. i don't think he could be replaced without damaging the movie


the german element of the film was an interesting touch. Casting Waltz who had played a nazi in Basterds, and having him here as an opposite must have been deliberate. Not sure exactly what it means, but seemed to me to be some kind of anti racism statement, in that Germans are often subject to the racism of always being portrayed as NAzis, which perhaps QT himself took part in to some extent? Something like that... Waltz's caharacter and Hildi's seemed an attempt at breaking stereotypes.

Waltz's performance was memorable but I never believed it or suspended my disbelief. But that may be more down to QTs unrealistic directing/writing.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 30, 2013)

Blacksploitation movie - meets spaghetti western about slavery - whats not to like?  I thought it was a blast and - unusually for tarintino - genuinely moving in places

Samuel Jackson's charcter is up there with one of the most unpleasant in cinema history as well.


----------



## Reno (Jan 30, 2013)

ska invita said:


> the german element of the film was an interesting touch. Casting Waltz who had played a nazi in Basterds, and having him here as an opposite must have been deliberate. Not sure exactly what it means, but seemed to me to be some kind of anti racism statement, in that Germans are often subject to the racism of always being portrayed as NAzis, which perhaps QT himself took part in to some extent? Something like that... Waltz's caharacter and Hildi's seemed an attempt at breaking stereotypes.
> 
> Waltz's performance was memorable but I never believed it or suspended my disbelief. But that may be more down to QTs unrealistic directing/writing.


 
The main reason why he was German is because Tarantino (and the rest of the world) liked Waltz's performance in Basterds so much, he especially wrote him a more central role here. Because of Waltz's Austrian accent the character had to come from a German speaking country. As simple as that.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 30, 2013)

Reno said:


> The main reason why he was German is because Tarantino (and the rest of the world) liked Waltz's performance in Basterds so much, he especially wrote him a more central role here. Because of Waltz's Austrian accent the character had to come from a German speaking country. As simple as that.


i take it you know that from an interview, and i dont doubt it, and that may well have been what began the idea of using him in the film, but it has to work in the context of the story, and at a worst case scenario even if no thought was given to how it comes across (which i doubt), it inspired those thoughts in me, so its true within the experience of the film iyswim. In addition to the inverted nazi thing, the fact Heidi speaks German is used as an anti-racist point within the script in Candieland.


----------



## Virtual Blue (Jan 30, 2013)

it's the best interracial buddy/cowboy movie since Blazing Saddles.


----------



## Reno (Jan 30, 2013)

ska invita said:


> i take it you know that from an interview, and i dont doubt it, and that may well have been what began the idea of using him in the film, but it has to work in the context of the story, and at a worst case scenario even if no thought was given to how it comes across (which i doubt), it inspired those thoughts in me, so its true within the experience of the film iyswim. In addition to the inverted nazi thing, the fact Heidi speaks German is used as an anti-racist point within the script in Candieland.


 
It's only an inverted Nazi thing if you think of all Germans primarely as Nazis. There were plenty of German immigrants and settlers in the US in the 19th century, so it's not that out of place. I wouldn't make too much of the whole German thing in terms of race and Hildi speaking German may be humorously incongrous for a black slave, but in terms of plot, it would have worked with any other language.

BTW. Heidi is a Swiss chick


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 30, 2013)

Reno said:


> It's only an inverted Nazi thing if you think of all Germans primarely as Nazis. There were plenty of German immigrants and settlers in the US in the 19th century, so it's not that out of place. I wouldn't make too much of the whole German thing in terms of race and Hildi speaking German may be humorously incongrous for a black slave, but in terms of plot, it would have worked with any other language.
> 
> BTW. Heidi is a Swiss chick


 
Yeah - but most people watching the film would not have much knowledge of the immigrant backgrounds of the population at the time. However they would make association of germans with being historical baddies - and not least because the same actor played a nazi in Tarantino's last film. Tarantino would absolutely be aware of this and by having Doc Schultz being the good guy whilst the rest of the white americans are effectively being the nazis was very much deliberate design IMHO.


----------



## imposs1904 (Jan 30, 2013)

Kaka Tim said:


> Yeah - but most people watching the film would not have much knowledge of the immigrant backgrounds of the population at the time. However they would make association of germans with being historical baddies - and not least because the same actor played a nazi in Tarantino's last film. *Tarantino would absolutely be aware of this and by having Doc Schultz being the good guy whilst the rest of the white americans are effectively being the nazis was very much deliberate design IMHO.*


 
That, or he just knew that Christoph Waltz was the right man for the part and wrote around it. 

Waltz absolutely stole that picture.


----------



## Reno (Jan 30, 2013)

Kaka Tim said:


> Yeah - but most people watching the film would not have much knowledge of the immigrant backgrounds of the population at the time. However they would make association of germans with being historical baddies - and not least because the same actor played a nazi in Tarantino's last film. Tarantino would absolutely be aware of this and by having Doc Schultz being the good guy whilst the rest of the white americans are effectively being the nazis was very much deliberate design IMHO.


 
I'm still not sure what valuable point that would be making about slavery. Sure it's relatively unusual to have good Germans in films, but that's about as far as it goes. To impose some reverse Nazi subtext is just overanalysing the film and doesn't really add anything of value in terms of meaning. Films aren't really like puzzles where every little thing has to have some hidden meaning. As imposs1904 said, it's more likely that things were written around the casting of Walz. Tarantino nearly always writes his lead parts for particular actors and their personalities shape his screenplays. In this case only one worked out, as Will Smith bailed.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 30, 2013)

Marx was going to move to a german communist settlement in Ohio (i think it was) in the years before the war - and their was an all german regiment from the area fighting for the north, mainly derived from the old workers defence militias from home (the Turnverein). This, is what i think Tarantino was alluding to.


----------



## belboid (Jan 30, 2013)

I'm not sure about 'Nazi subtext' specifically, but QT was clearly playing with preconceptions about national stereotypes, and migrants, and using Waltz as a cracking starting point for those observations. you see it again at the end with QT's own appearance with that bizarre accent.


----------



## Random (Jan 30, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Marx was going to move to a german communist settlement in Ohio (i think it was) in the years before the war - and their was an all german regiment from the area fighting for the north, mainly derived from the old workers defence militias from home (the Turnverein). This, is what i think Tarantino was alluding to.


In the Difference Engine by Bruce Sterling and William Gibson the 1870s Commune happens in Manhatten, led by K Marx, and survives, iirc


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 30, 2013)

Random said:


> In the Difference Engine by Bruce Sterling and William Gibson the 1870s Commune happens in Manhatten, led by K Marx, and survives, iirc


Never read it, sounds interesting though. Another potentially interesting one,_ Spielberg does John Brown_ (or Tarantino).


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 30, 2013)

imposs1904 said:


> That, or he just knew that Christoph Waltz was the right man for the part and wrote around it.
> 
> Waltz absolutely stole that picture.


 
Sure - but he will still have been aware of the messages that would have conveyed.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jan 30, 2013)

Reno said:


> I'm still not sure what valuable point that would be making about slavery. Sure it's relatively unusual to have good Germans in films, but that's about as far as it goes. To impose some reverse Nazi subtext is just overanalysing the film and doesn't really add anything of value in terms of meaning. Films aren't really like puzzles where every little thing has to have some hidden meaning. As imposs1904 said, it's more likely that things were written around the casting of Walz. Tarantino nearly always writes his lead parts for particular actors and their personalities shape his screenplays. In this case only one worked out, as Will Smith bailed.


 
Yes, Jamie Foxx was just too vanilla.


----------



## Reno (Jan 30, 2013)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> Yes, Jamie Foxx was just too vanilla.


 
The point would have been to cast Smith against type and make the most aimable and least threatening of black male stars into someone angry and confrontational. Tarantino has done this counter casting a few times before, most notably with Travolta. I think it's a shame it didn't work out. Also Smith is a far more charismatic film star than Foxx and would have balanced ot Walz a little bit.


----------



## ymu (Jan 30, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Marx was going to move to a german communist settlement in Ohio (i think it was) in the years before the war - and their was an all german regiment from the area fighting for the north, mainly derived from the old workers defence militias from home (the Turnverein). This, is what i think Tarantino was alluding to.


That makes plenty of sense, thanks. The dodgy Australian accent was also part of a broader historical story that ended up on the cutting room floor.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 30, 2013)

Reno said:


> I'm still not sure what valuable point that would be making about slavery. Sure it's relatively unusual to have good Germans in films, but that's about as far as it goes. To impose some reverse Nazi subtext is just overanalysing the film and doesn't really add anything of value in terms of meaning. Films aren't really like puzzles where every little thing has to have some hidden meaning. As imposs1904 said, it's more likely that things were written around the casting of Walz. Tarantino nearly always writes his lead parts for particular actors and their personalities shape his screenplays. In this case only one worked out, as Will Smith bailed.


 
I dont think there's a specifically 'nazi subtext' hidden or otherwise - but the idea that the slaver states justified their society through a deep seated belief in their own racial superiority is made absolutely explicitly in the film and that obviously associates them with the most infamous example of a society built on such notions.
In that context, having a german as the one white man in the film who is demonstrably opposed to slavery is a wry joke by QT. Its not 'hidden'. Its not pointed out with a big arrow - but - like any director - he will have thought about what associations the audience make about what they see.

One thing I liked about the film was that it went for Americas disgusting history of slavery with both barrels (literally). No pussyfooting about the poor misunderstood south nor earnest exposition of facts - but a full on 'lets kill them evil slave-owning racist motherfuckers'.


----------



## The Octagon (Jan 30, 2013)

I'm sure Will Smith is happy with how his career's gone, but he hasn't half passed on a couple of big parts.

Wasn't he first choice for Neo in The Matrix too?


----------



## belboid (Jan 30, 2013)

ymu said:


> That makes plenty of sense, thanks. The dodgy Australian accent was also part of a broader historical story that ended up on the cutting room floor.


ooh, is there any more anywhere online about what that might have been? Sounds promising.  All of us, that I went with, came out going 'wtf was that?', but a bit of research showed that actually, it was a perfectly sensible, historically, scene, that there were quite a lot of aussie migrants who would have had _an_ accent- even if not that particular one - and that they were, in fact, somewhat less racist than 'mainstream' yankees - or at least differently racist.


----------



## Reno (Jan 30, 2013)

The Octagon said:


> I'm sure Will Smith is happy with how his career's gone, but he hasn't half passed on a couple of big parts.
> 
> Wasn't he first choice for Neo in The Matrix too?


 
Loads of films stars have passed up on parts that became iconic. The Matrix would have been just another blockbuster role. The thing with Smith is that he always plays it very safe, mostly sticking to blockbusters that don't challenge him much. He seems mostly preoccupied with his image as a movie star, which is why he turned down Django. It's a shame, because in the few cases where he took more challenging roles, he was very good. Even Tom Cruise occasionally takes a role that completely takes him out of his comfort zone for acting brownie points.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 30, 2013)

I for one am very happy that the script called for the main character to gain some skills and develop a trade.

Django Untrained would make a rotten sequel.


----------



## ymu (Jan 30, 2013)

belboid said:


> ooh, is there any more anywhere online about what that might have been? Sounds promising. All of us, that I went with, came out going 'wtf was that?', but a bit of research showed that actually, it was a perfectly sensible, historically, scene, that there were quite a lot of aussie migrants who would have had _an_ accent- even if not that particular one - and that they were, in fact, somewhat less racist than 'mainstream' yankees - or at least differently racist.


I came across it as an aside in a review. There was a whole subplot around the mining company, imported Australian workers and a repeat of the line Django delivers to Candie's lawyer on the stairs, pointing out that they're not much different from slaves.

I'd love to see a director's cut, if only he did them.


----------



## belboid (Jan 30, 2013)

ymu said:


> I came across it as an aside in a review. There was a whole subplot around the mining company, imported Australian workers and a repeat of the line Django delivers to Candie's lawyer on the stairs, pointing out that they're not much different from slaves.


mm, sounds fun



> I'd love to see a director's cut, if only he did them.


Yes he does. It's the thing that gets released!


----------



## Reno (Jan 30, 2013)

I really don't need more of Tarantino's "acting" or the backstory to a marginal character.


----------



## belboid (Jan 30, 2013)

Reno said:


> I really don't need more of Tarantino's "acting" or the backstory to a marginal character.


he wouldn't be marginal if he played a bigger and more important role!


----------



## Reno (Jan 30, 2013)

belboid said:


> he wouldn't be marginal if he played a bigger and more important role!


 
I can't see the point of padding out a film that is already too long, especially during the last third. And a bit of backstory still won't make him a central character to the plot. Apart from that Tarantino's acting is awful as nearly always and I really don't need more of it. More isn't always better with films.


----------



## belboid (Jan 30, 2013)

Reno said:


> More isn't always better with films.


No one is going to disagree with that!

I could see such a section working, and I'd find it interesting - although it probably would need to be interpolated into the film along the way, rather than just tagged on at the end. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with the idea tho.


----------



## ymu (Jan 30, 2013)

belboid said:


> mm, sounds fun
> 
> 
> Yes he does. It's the thing that gets released!


Well, precisely. He sees the editing process as part of the scriptwriting, so there's no "this is how I would have done it without stupid commercial imperatives blocking the way".

Three hours isn't long enough to tell the story he wanted to tell. He did re-edit Kill Bill in small ways and one big way to make it into a single very long film, but he did Django as a one-parter to start with so it's all we're getting.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 30, 2013)

ymu said:


> I came across it as an aside in a review. There was a whole subplot around the mining company, imported Australian workers and a repeat of the line Django delivers to Candie's lawyer on the stairs, pointing out that they're not much different from slaves.
> 
> I'd love to see a director's cut, if only he did them.


 
There were cornish miners too.....mad fuckers who were known as the hardest working.


----------



## belboid (Jan 30, 2013)

Yeah, they crop up in Deadwood.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 30, 2013)

Reno said:


> It's only an inverted Nazi thing if you think of all Germans primarely as Nazis.


Its an inverted Nazi thing because this same actor has just played a Nazi in the previous QT chapter. It works as a sort of casting against type, based on his last casting. Personally I think Germans often do suffer negative representation post WW2, with bad taste jokes made to this day in the media.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 30, 2013)

belboid said:


> differently racist.


political correctness gone mad!


----------



## ymu (Jan 30, 2013)

ska invita said:


> Its an inverted Nazi thing because this same actor has just played a Nazi in the previous QT chapter. It works as a sort of casting against type, based on his last casting. Personally I think Germans often do suffer negative representation post WW2, with bad taste jokes made to this day in the media.


It's not casting against type. It's exactly the same role, but as a good guy.

Ooh, this just came up:



> Glinner
> Django Unchained script (PDF) http://twcguilds.com/assets/screenplay/django/screenplay.pdf (via @4b5)


----------



## ska invita (Jan 30, 2013)

ymu said:


> It's exactly the same role, but as a good guy.
> :


not sure what the disagreement is. anyhow i was just 'sharing', not really up for an argument about it


----------



## Reno (Jan 30, 2013)

ska invita said:


> Its an inverted Nazi thing because this same actor has just played a Nazi in the previous QT chapter. It works as a sort of casting against type, based on his last casting. Personally I think Germans often do suffer negative representation post WW2, with bad taste jokes made to this day in the media.


 
Tell me about it. And it's not just the media. In London I've had the Holocaust pinned on me personally by someone who overheard my German accent. And I read quite a bit of xenophobic Nazi crap on this very forum, which was one reason I couldn't be arsed with Urban for a year.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 30, 2013)

Reno said:


> And it's not just the media.


oh yeah of course, i highlighted media because we're talking about a film and therefore representation. 
my general point was that it was refreshing to see a 'positive' german character, particular in the light of Basterds, and it came into relief considering the general themes of the film.


----------



## ymu (Jan 30, 2013)

ska invita said:


> not sure what the disagreement is. anyhow i was just 'sharing', not really up for an argument about it


Not trying to pick an argument. I actually deleted a para where I agreed with your earlier assessment of Waltz's performance because I was boring myself ...


----------



## ymu (Jan 30, 2013)

Only browsed the first page of the screenplay, but it looks like it explains a lot of references in a humorous and very readable way. 



> As the credits play, Django has a SPAGHETTI WESTERN FLASHBACK. Now Spaghetti Western flashbacks are never pretty ...


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 30, 2013)

Re the German thing, whether QT was aiming to do it or not I had the same reactions as belboid and Kata. It's not just that Schwartz is a German but also the references to Seigfried and the fact he is a _particular_ type of German - cultured, intelligent. To me that brought to mind the question that many asked about how it was Germany, the most cultural of all European countries, that could fall to fascism. (A stupid question maybe but one that lots have asked).


----------



## Ted Striker (Jan 31, 2013)

Prior to IB, I really wasn't a fan of QT films - they were good, and appealed to the cheesy psuedo-movie-student 'spot the influences' in me though were never really worthy of the adulation they received...And then I saw IB, which is probably in my top 50 films ever, and I actually can't think any better performances than Waltz (in IB) in the last 20 years...

Just saw DU last night, and it's...good...IMO. I rate Foxx pretty highly, even if he's not in particularly stretching roles (though I haven't seen Ray) and he delivers here. I actually found SLJ extremely annoying, and just represented an Oceans-12ish exercise in a silly back-slapping display of affection between him and QT. Waltz is a bit too similar to his character in IB, and without the surprise (of not knowing him previously) and nothing like the scenes in IB he steals, I wasn't as blown away as others may be - still an Oscar cert though! Leonardo never really added much IMO (in fact, I think someone else could have given it a dimension), though I do give him some credit for trying such particularly accented roles...I actually liked the QT cameo, not because it was him but because you know it's coming and it's his hallmark (that said, was he actually in IB? I can't remember?) and to wish to deprive him of that would feel sour.

Storyline's a bit pony - no way would the blood thirsty rednecks sell him to the miners/the shootout was pure A-Team/I guess it's too much to ask for Walt's backstory and again, SLJ (and his inherent smugness) pissed me off (even if the bits where he's doing the 'uh-huh's' behind LDC's prose made me mini lol)

What I would say is this...The theme/language (did anyone hear the N word at all?)/Gore...It kind of made me think QT really has an issue with, well, black people...like for him to be either so bold or without restraint, it's clearly a big part of his consciousness/awareness, and just felt like if it _was_, then one would normally do the polite thing, and not show them in a film that felt like it was 'showing' - almost celebrating - rather than 'highlighting' the suffering/cruelty etc of the South way back when. It just felt like a straight man doing a graphic film about homosexuality (in a really crass way of describing it)!


----------



## Reno (Jan 31, 2013)

Ted Striker said:


> Prior to IB, I really wasn't a fan of QT films - they were good, and appealed to the cheesy psuedo-movie-student 'spot the influences' in me though were never really worthy of the adulation they received...And then I saw IB, which is probably in my top 50 films ever, and I actually can't think any better performances than Waltz (in IB) in the last 20 years...


 
Have you seen Jackie Brown ? It's the first film of his where the characters have some depth  instead of being sounding boards for pop cultural references. That one and Inglorious Basterds are the two of his films which I genuinely love. With the others I can see why they are popular and what's good about them and I even fitfully enjoyed them, but they weren't quite for me.


----------



## Ted Striker (Jan 31, 2013)

Funnily enough I saw JB (for the first time - I was saving it once I saw and loved IB!) on Sunday...

It felt the tiniest bit flat as in being a pretty vanilla heisty/twisty fillum and whilst De Niro and Fonda pissed me off a little but Pam Grier is all kinds of awesome in it, so I did quiet like it (tho not on the normal QT plane - i.e it was a good 'film' but not a particularly good IMO exercise in QT-ness).


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 31, 2013)

Reno said:


> Have you seen Jackie Brown ? It's the first film of his where the characters have some depth instead of being sounding boards for pop cultural references.


 
The one with someone elses characters and story.....and dialogue?


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 31, 2013)

Ted Striker said:


> Funnily enough I saw JB (for the first time - I was saving it once I saw and loved IB!) on Sunday...
> 
> It felt the tiniest bit flat as in being a pretty vanilla heisty/twisty fillum and whilst De Niro and Fonda pissed me off a little but Pam Grier is all kinds of awesome in it, so I did quiet like it (tho not on the normal QT plane - i.e it was a good 'film' but not a particularly good IMO exercise in QT-ness).


 
I disliked it the first time because it felt 'flat' as you describe....but it has really grown on me and and further viewing without expectation gave way to me allowing the characters more time and accepting that they are not hip gunslingers firing off tarantino 'rock'n'roll' dialogue....

I really love the Robert Forster character, Pam Grier is ace, DeNiro in stoner mode is funny.......the film unwinds instead of explodes and has some measure of reality in it which is missing in much of Tarantino's output. The people have real stories with real problems in a real world. It's a few steps away from the comic book pop culture of Kill Bill and True Romance.

I'd like to see Tarantino do a Carl Hiaasan story.


----------



## Reno (Jan 31, 2013)

Nanker Phelge said:


> The one with someone elses characters and story.....and dialogue?


 
Sure, the film may well be better for being and adaptation and this may be the reason why the characters are more rounded. I haven't read Rum Punch, so I don't know how much of the dialogue is from the novel. I'm not argueing against that. It's still very reconisably a Tarantino film though.

Is Jaws thought of as a Peter Benchley movie ?


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 31, 2013)

Reno said:


> Is Jaws thought of as a Peter Benchley movie ?


 
No, and that wasn't the point I was making, hence I didn't mention the author of Rum Punch.

I was pointing out that Jackie Brown is a better film because Tarantino did not devise the story around a whole rattlebag of pop references and his own idea of a crime/heist thriller and crime heist speak.

E.L has some pretty funky pop culture language himself and some pretty funky pop culture story telling, just not quite a comic book and fan boy as Q.T. It's 'hardboiled'.


----------



## belboid (Jan 31, 2013)

Reno said:


> Sure, the film may well be better for being and adaptation and this may be the reason why the characters are more rounded. I haven't read Rum Punch, so I don't know how much of the dialogue is from the novel. I'm not argueing against that. It's still very reconisably a Tarantino film though.
> 
> Is Jaws thought of as a Peter Benchley movie ?


the thing about Jackie Brown, tho, is that it is just about the only Elmore Leonard where the fact that it is Elmore Leonard is secondary.  Even Get Shorty was sold as JT & Daddy etc in Elmore Leonards....

The fact that EL is not even the second name one thinks of when talking about Jackie Brown is a testimony to its greatness.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 3, 2013)

I saw it tonight and liked it a lot, the best QT movie since Jackie Brown.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 3, 2013)

I don't think there is a reverse-Nazi subtext at all, the guy is simply a very good actor who QT had worked with previously.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 8, 2013)

Anyone seen Trinity?

 any good?


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 8, 2013)

ska invita said:


> Anyone seen Trinity?
> 
> any good?



That reminds me...better get the dinner on.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 8, 2013)

The Trinity films are decent comedy-westerns.   Lots of slapping, I recall.


----------



## Reno (Feb 8, 2013)

Bud Spencer and Terrence Hill as a comedy duo were huge all over Europe in the 70s and early 80s. It's OK if you like really broad comedy I suppose. Eventually they branched out into other genres like adventure, cop and spy films.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 8, 2013)

sleaterkinney said:


> I don't think there is a reverse-Nazi subtext at all, the guy is simply a very good actor who QT had worked with previously.


the thing about film is if watching a film triggers thoughts and correlations then these are valid, whether intentional or not. This particular example isnt particularly subconscious or anything.

Films aren't concrete things with defined meanings - they're a bunch of pictures in a sequence ultimately open for personal interpretation. Jungian i guess. The writers and directors dont have ownership over the meaning of a film - once its made and out there its in the eye of the beholder.

Ive been thinking about this: reading interviews and watching directors commentary is for me the point where you say, im ready to kill off all the magic of the film, all the mystery and interpretation, and deconstruct it to the bone. That process happens too fast now IMO - it can happen even before you've seen the film! For example when I went to see this there was some kind of featurette/advert/trailer about Django unchained, directly before the film: actors talking heads, snippets from the film - i had to plug my ears and close my eyes - id managed to avoid all the build up up till then - to be hit with it just before it started playing was a wind up.

For me to get into a film you have to suspend your disbelief - to watch a film whilst continuously thinking about performances, camera angles, who would have been in this role, etc. etc. just spoils a movie (to some degree at least - there's a balance there).  To want to do it afterwards is better than during, but it still makes it much harder to ever truly enjoy the film for what it is. Its deconstruction gone mad!! Maybe some people can juggle both the technical deconsturction and the 'magic' of it simultaneously, but that is a skill.

I can kind of do it with music - enjoy the technical aspects, back story, and still wholeheartedly get into the music, but it takes a bit of effort. If you listen to a piece of dance music and just hear : Copy and paste loop x 16, Emu patch #4, Good Foot break sped up, chain compression, etc. then you lose the whole point of why music is enjoyable/meaningful. Coffee rambling now... but yeah, what i like most about film is the 'dream' aspect of it, and getting lost inside it, and enjoying the thoughts that crop up.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 8, 2013)

DexterTCN said:


> The Trinity films are decent comedy-westerns. Lots of slapping, I recall.


Supposedly this was a big influence on DU.


----------



## Reno (Feb 8, 2013)

ska invita said:


> For me to get into a film you have to suspend your disbelief - to watch a film whilst continuously thinking about performances, camera angles, who would have been in this role, etc. etc. just spoils a movie (to some degree at least - there's a balance there). To want to do it afterwards is better than during, but it still makes it much harder to ever truly enjoy the film for what it is. Its deconstruction gone mad!! Maybe some people can juggle both the technical deconsturction and the 'magic' of it simultaneously, but that is a skill.


 
I've always been interested in how films are made and discussed, but I've never had a problem with suspending my disbelief during a film when I'm enjoying it. Only bad films I start to pick apart while I watch them. The first time I watch a good film I usually get caught up in it, then when I re-watch them I pay more attention to film-making aspects.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Feb 8, 2013)

ska invita said:


> Anyone seen Trinity?
> 
> any good?




My Name is Nobody, Boot Hill and My Name is Trinity are all quite good, but all go more for comedy....riffing off the silent stranger storylines, lots of slapstick mixed in with more traditional euro-western themes and lots of faces you'll recognise like Woody Strode. My Name is Nobody has a great final scene and theme tune.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Feb 8, 2013)

I'm surprised that Skin Game starring Lousi Gosset Jnr and James Garne hasn't been cited much in discussions about Django Unchained. Being a film about a slave and a white man working together to 'con' people it's a lot closer in theme that many of the films mentioned......I remember it being on alot when I was younger and really enjoying it. Aint seen it for years, but will track down.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 9, 2013)

Reno said:


> I've always been interested in how films are made and discussed, but I've never had a problem with suspending my disbelief during a film when I'm enjoying it. Only bad films I start to pick apart while I watch them. The first time I watch a good film I usually get caught up in it, then when I re-watch them I pay more attention to film-making aspects.


im with you on that. but it is tempting to run straight into commentaries, imdb trivia, interviews etc of great films post watching them, but i try and limit that on films that have been a great watch and that have had a magic about them. not too fussed on films that weren't all that good anyway.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Feb 9, 2013)

Nanker Phelge said:


> There were cornish miners too.....mad fuckers who were known as the hardest working.


 

Being the hardest worker when you're getting paid a penny a day to constantly face death in a hole.... seems kinda dumb.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Feb 9, 2013)

redsquirrel said:


> Germany, the most cultural of all European countries


 
Germany had and has lots of culture; but I'm sure many Europeans would disagree that they were the most cultural.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Feb 9, 2013)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Being the hardest worker when you're getting paid a penny a day to constantly face death in a hole.... seems kinda dumb.


 
They were Cornish......


----------



## bi0boy (Mar 30, 2013)

Just seen this. I didn't actually recognise Samuel L. Jackson until the credits at the end.


----------



## Ted Striker (Mar 30, 2013)

ska invita said:


> I can kind of do it with music - enjoy the technical aspects, back story, and still wholeheartedly get into the music, but it takes a bit of effort. If you listen to a piece of dance music and just hear : Copy and paste loop x 16, Emu patch #4, Good Foot break sped up, chain compression, etc. then you lose the whole point of why music is enjoyable/meaningful. Coffee rambling now... but yeah, what i like most about film is the 'dream' aspect of it, and getting lost inside it, and enjoying the thoughts that crop up.


 
Totally 'get' this, especially the music bit. I've moved away from DJing over the past few years, and when I do go out and have a dance, I'm enjoying it SO much more because I'm not _thinking_ about it. It's awesome!


----------



## tendril (Jun 16, 2013)

Just got around to seeing this. All shades of awesome. Jackson played the Uncle Tom character to perfection. Christoph Waltz absolutely deserved his oscar and I even like Leonardo in this (and I'm not usually a fan).


----------



## Johnny Vodka (Dec 7, 2013)

Watched this tonight.  Easily his worst film.


----------

