Find a flaw. You can't. DJAAAAAAAAANGOOOOOOOOOOOOOO jango........ DJAAAANGOOOO jango...
Find a flaw. You can't. DJAAAAAAAAANGOOOOOOOOOOOOOO jango........ DJAAAANGOOOO jango...
Find a flaw. You can't. DJAAAAAAAAANGOOOOOOOOOOOOOO jango........ DJAAAANGOOOO jango...
The dentist guy became too unbearable to be a likeable supporting character. I'm also not convinced that slaves harbored such strong romantic feelings for each other, that it could be portrayed this way even in a work of fiction.
If the jango slave was so in love with his wife why did he just do nothing for 6 months? Why didn’t he go try to rescue her right away. She could have been endlessly raped all those months, killed, beaten, impregnated. But nah, Jango was too busy doing bounty hunter shit to go help her.
The best slavery movie ever
You obviously haven’t seen pic related
This guy knows.
But Goodbye Uncle Tom is the true #1 in that category. Mandingo gets second place.
Naw, I've seen that, and Goodbye Uncle Tom
, Django has a better ending, better writing, and better characters.
WHEN THERE ARE CLOUDS IN THE SKIES AND THEY ARE GREY
YOU MAY BE SAD, BUT REMEMBER THEY'LL ALL SOON PASS AWAY
OH DJANGO, AFTER THE SHOWERS THE SUN WILL BE SHINNING
They didn’t have dynamite in the years this movie was set
Likewise, many of the guns were not period accurate
There’s probably a better cut in editing. When looking at the script it seems like it would have been better as a miniseries instead of a movie.
THE moronic AUSTRALIANS
Quentin was a stickler for authenticity
>Find a flaw.
Why would you want to?
Would have been better if Leo didn't die and end was just a slow pan from django working in the mines
did you have to make this post as homework for your intro to nihilism class?
>movie ends with Django waking up and realizing it was all a dream before beginning his daily picking
the history was way off...that and they would have killed the Black person on the spot at the end. so stupid
you got sand, anon. i got no use for an anon with sand [speaking to jannies] i want you to take his ass to the auction and sell him to another board. and you will sell him cheap [speaking to henchmen] brand a Cinemaphile on his cheek
Why did Samuel Jackson character fake a limp? And if he was so smart, why was he so happy being Candy's slave? It's like Tarantino tried to make Kieser Size out of him but it made zero sense because Samuel L was not a criminal mastermind that tried to fool the authorities - he just a slave who had nothing to gain doing all that shit.
He was addicted to the power of being above all the other slaves
So why was he faking a limp and acting moronic?
So they would pity him more I guess?Seems obvious to me it was all just part of his act
Was he faking?
Feigning weakness/inferiority to whites to hide his powerlevel
If his true nature was known to Calvin he'd be removed for being too smart. They as slavers can't have black people being obviously just as intelligent as whites
Believe it or not, not every slave hated their circumstances. Jackson played a house slave who lived a pretty comfy life, caring for a prestigious family that has beloved him for generations.
drawing out the ending so Quentin can do an australian accent
thats not Django
That Django is a SJW.
I'm pretty sure he fought the not-Klan because they had gold and he wanted it
Too long. One two many endings. Anti-climactic. Will Smith would have been better and I actually agree with his reasoning for not accepting the part (he insisted Django should be the one killing Candie, not Schultz).
>he insisted Django should be the one killing Candie, not Schultz
dumbest take i've seen on Cinemaphile in months
That's literally why Will Smith reportedly turned down the role.
It would have been better.
>Will Smith would have been better and I actually agree with his reasoning for not accepting the part (he insisted Django should be the one killing Candie, not Schultz).
Schultz killing Candie is analogous to the Civil War.
Django killing him would've just been a black power trip.
>Schultz killing Candie is analogous to the Civil War.
That's fine
>Django killing him would've just been a black power trip.
Wtf do you think the rest of the movie was anon?
>Wtf do you think the rest of the movie was anon?
Schultz exploiting a black guy to do his own dirty work while justifying it to himself as helping him, then realizing after meeting Candie and hearing all of his justifications of his own lifestyle that he's been no different from him. I didn't feel like Django was really the focus of the movie.
So you're saying none of it was a black power fantasy
If you look at it in dumb, surface-level way.
Dig a bit deeper and you remember that Django was always a slave, he only changed owners.
You're awfully presumptuous anon.
It would have felt more like a proper blaxploitation flick if Django had been a more prominent character, killed Candice himself, and led his own way to freedom. But you wouldn't like that for some reason.
>It would have felt more like a proper blaxploitation flick
>But you wouldn't like that for some reason.
To be fair, I'm not a black person
>Schultz exploiting a black guy to do his own dirty work while justifying it to himself as helping him, then realizing after meeting Candie and hearing all of his justifications of his own lifestyle that he's been no different from him.
Lmao, Candie was a moron larping as a cultured intellectual and Schultz (a real cultured gentleman) got pissed off because of his own ego (remember the Dumas was black scene).
Schultz put Broomhilda's papers in his back pocket after Tarantino beats you over the head with his paper folding the whole film (he always put it in his front vest). everything he did in that last scene was premeditated
I think it hit Schultz too hard when he went with his ruthless black slave sidekick and met with Candie and his own ruthless black slave sidekick. To see how much Candie's slave loved him and thought he was doing right by him, and then he turns and sees Django, his own property, a mirror image of Candie's.
>To see how much Candie's slave loved him and thought he was doing right by him
Yeh but Tarantino kinda makes that relationship odd when he shows Stephen straightening up and walking sans cane. Plus, Stephen had a much more proactive Role in running the plantation than Django did with Stephen. Schultz doesn't see himself as the owner of Django.
I don't follow
>Django killing him would've just been a black power trip.
yeah i would hate if the movie was a black power trip. btw what do you think of inglorious bastards?
It's like when the bullied kid at school draws pictures how he punches his bullied.
Should've been a spaghetti western set in the wild west, instead of the slave trade of the south. Then Hateful Eight wouldn't have felt like such a wasted opportunity as his Tarantino's first proper western
Too many black people.
I think it's better when you view it as a comedy. Saw it again recently and I think it's really good. However, OP, I would say, the flaw is, the final act drags a bit, starting from when wassname Hanz gets got. great movie tho
The darkie didn't take care of the dentist guy's beloved horse afterwards
My father loved westerns and enjoyed the Old Django and this Django very much. So, yeah, is Kino.
Instead he ended up in The Harder They Fall, which actually is a straight-up blaxploitation, only it didn't seem to do all that well.
The reasoning behind their scheme is dumb. The whole "Candy wouldn't give him the time of time" plot device seems forced to me. Like I don't know man, would he decline Schulz if he came up to him and asked him to buy his German speaking slave since he's German himself for twice the regular price out of sheer eccentricity? All he'd need to would be to sign a piece of paper. It's not like Broomhilda meant anything to him.
Even more likely seems to be that Candy would have some sort of handler to deal with mundane slave business, no?
Hemmed in by trying to get it politically balanced
Obscenely anti-white