thelio

i think the dog scene showed that the doc thought he got the brutility that was involved in slavery, but he really didnt. He was a bounry hunter and had no problem killing criminals for the bounty but seeing a man ripped apart by dogs he could not take. Django already knew the brutality of slavery. he had witnessed it before he had experienced it. why would he show as mush distress as the doc? i liked this scene because he showed the a white man thought he got it, but he really didnt until it was in his face. And every event after that made the doctor even more angry. which is why right before shooting candie he said he can't help it. he was so angry and disgusted by the way that man viewed other humans. Django was no stranger to this treatment and attitude. i also think he knew that if he showed too much emotions such as anger or sadness, their cover would had been blown. he was suppose to be use to seeing such horrors in the mandigo fights. he couldnt let something like that fizzle him up.

spiderlashes5000

Django never stepped out of character...and he survived.

I said he (and Broomhilda) let their guard down by looking at each other too much. Stephen figured it out and turned them into massah.

In really oppressive conditions like that, you can't always expect empathy. Likes crabs in a barrel.

You realize none of this is factual info, right? There's no right and wrong interpretations. The characters and situations were made complex and imperfect on purpose.

__________________
3b (with 3c tendencies) on modified CG

scrills

^^^

I can compare the two. The doc was smart. Django could have showed the same thing

Stepping out of character
Rememeber that when he did that (acting like he did on the road), the doc actually asked him to stop. That was above and beyond what he had to do. The doc thought so and so do I.

Staying in chararter when Sam Jackson
Again, I wouldn't him to step out of character. In the house, yes he had to behave a certain way. by the time he was with the miners, his cover was blown. We may have to agree to disagree, but he could have tossed those keys a key or something. No one was around to see it

The doc was smart
In my opinion, the doc came off as wise and Django came off as always using brute force. I'm just saying that I would have liked to see some character development.

The dog scene
there were other ways to show he was upset while staying in character. In fact, they did it with the doc. you only knew he was upset because of his flashbacks. He didn't step out of character and yet we knew he was upset.


i know it's a movie. I know I can't make QT write it the way that I want, I'm just stating that Django's character development was weak and he came off and too flat for my taste.

scrills

looking like we were typing at the same time. Yeah, it's fictional but that my take on the character. In my opinion, a more multi-dimensional character would have worked better for me.

I think my point is that I'm not giving QT a pass on that piece. Most of the rest, I can live with

ETA

It reminds me of the Bechdel rule. sometimes it bothers me, sometimes it doesn't. Apply it to Django and change the rule to two blacks instead of two women, and it made me think.

Basically, I left the theater thinking, "that was good was something was off". That was what as off for me

kayb

It's fictional, but I love it!

I don't mind doing movie analyses. I live for this sort of thing!

__________________
I ain't thirsty. There's plenty of fish in the sea, but I don't want all of them, can I have some standards? Or do we just have to settle, for someone's who meh and will do.
"

spiderlashes5000

I believe Django freed the slaves in the wagon at the mining company.

The doc may have been smart but usually the last man standing in a movie is the smartest or the most resourceful or whatever. And that was Django.

An illiterate slave (w/ a traumatic brain injury scar on his forehead, no less LOL) was able to cheat death numerous times, beat the system and accomplish his goal.

He learned to read, comport himself like a savvy businessman, shoot a rifle, shoot a pistol, rig dynamite. He figured out who he could trust and who he couldn't. He knew when to shoot and when not to. He was a penniless, shackled broken shell of a person in the opening scene and was sir lancelot at the end.

I don't know when I've seen so much growth!

(But yeah, he def had a bit of a 'tude. LOL)

__________________
3b (with 3c tendencies) on modified CG

hippychic

i loved the movie for what it was...

__________________
LOIS (OS); cottony, TYPE 4 hair, fine strands; no cones bcz my hair hates them; last relaxer '98; ignores most natural hair rules; on BC #8 (i think)

faves: no fancy products but love unrefined shea, castor & dabur mustard oil; ecostyler blue gel, aloe vera juice (spritz). hair keeps changing so rediscovering again!

thelio

Why Samuel L. Jackson and Leonardo DiCaprio were snubbed by the Oscars | theGrio

what do you all think? leo never gets nomination even when he deserves it. i think is like 50 years he will get a life time acheivement award form the academy.

spiderlashes5000

I know...the Academy is so conscientious....

__________________
3b (with 3c tendencies) on modified CG

geeky

I don't know. I don't find Leo to be a good actor at all. I've never seen him in anything where I can actually suspend disbelief and he beciomes the character. To me it is always "There's Leonardo DiCaprio talking with a strange accent"

__________________
To Trenell, MizKerri and geeky:
I pray none of you ever has to live in a communist state.

Geeky is my hero. She's the true badass. The badass who doesn't even need to be a badass. There aren't enough O's in cool to describe her.

geeky

What did you guys think of the Broomhilda character?

I must say I was a little disappointed that there was not really much for her in the script. I tend to expect more from QT because while his portrayals of women are not without issues he usually has a number of interesting, fleshed out female characters in his movies, but both this and Basterd were kind of lacking.

On the other hand, I think she was portrayed in a way that black women rarely are in most films. So many movies show black women as one stereotype or another. If a black woman is shown as at all attractive/desirable then it is usually as "exotic" or over-the-top oversexualized. Either that or she is the asexual angry black woman. I remember seeing the shots where Django is imagining he sees Hildy in the field in the yellow dress and thinking that black women are so rarely filmed in this manner to create this kind of mood.

__________________
To Trenell, MizKerri and geeky:
I pray none of you ever has to live in a communist state.

Geeky is my hero. She's the true badass. The badass who doesn't even need to be a badass. There aren't enough O's in cool to describe her.

spiderlashes5000

I thought it was natural we got only small glimpses of her bc she was kind of the "McGuffin" of the story. And if too many details about her had been provided, we might have been like, "Django, man, just move on! She is so not worth the aggravation." LOL

__________________
3b (with 3c tendencies) on modified CG

thelio

well in the original script, QT had more of her. including a more detailed backstory of django and her. when filming came, he felt he couldnt film it right and between that and editing thats the broomhilda we got. i likes it and i agree with geeky that you dont see balck women portrayed like that very often in films, she wasnt oversexualized and she wasnt angry. i really liked the quick "daydreams" he would have of her.

Dedachan

I feel that some of the problems raised here are legitimate, but it is not realistic to expect one movie to adress the entire reality of what slavery meant.

Django's character isn't realistic, much like Uma's in Kill Bill isn't. It's not meant to be. It's fiction. For one thing, how did he know how to ride horses and shoot guns before we even got the part where Schutz starts mentoring him? What matters is did he expose the violence and cruelty of slavery in a way that was trueful? I would argue QT was well suited for this task, as he isn't afraid to depict violence and not sugarcoat how cruel men can be. There were moments when violence was romanticized, but not when directed at the slaves. He made sure those scenes struck a nerve.

Django didn't bond with other slaves, but I think that would have detracted from the story. This is very much a man who is focused on a mission. He is not out to make friends. When he killed the men who were taking him to the mine, I did also expect him to say something along the lines of what Schultz said to the slaves he freed in the beginning. But I'm glad he didn't. It would have been gimmicky and predictable. Schultz was wordy, used a sophisticated vocabulary that, as a running gag, nobody ever understood. Language wasn't Django strenght. Nothing needed to be said. He did free the slaves, didn't he? He is his own person and doesn't need to morph into Dr. Schulz (that would be an odd definition of growth, IMO).

That scene was more about the slaves looking at him in awe. To me, they were witnessing a legend being born. Artistically, a much better solution than having them all chat with each other. He is more like Clint Eastwood as the man with no name (a lone, mysterious cowboy) in the spaghetti westerns that influenced QT in that scene than like Schulzt.

I think character growth is overrated sometimes. I don't think every movie has to be about how a character learns to cease the day or whatever other self-help platitute you've seen in hundreds of other movies. Sometimes the external objective is enough. However, a character did go through a transformation, and that was Schulz. Having a secondary character go through a transformation instead of the primary one is also a valid narrative structure (one classic example: Ferris Bueller and Cameron) and a very sophisticated one too, I would argue.

murrrcat

That's probably because you can't get over how leonardo leonardo is so, so you only realize leonardo is just leonardo.


You could hear leonardo's leonardo voice come out a lot in that mvoie when he was emotional....BECAUSE HE REALLY CUT HIS HAND IN THAT SCENE. and everyone's facial reaction was their actual reactions because he was bleeding everywhere. (fo' real tho. fun fact).


I thought Broomhilde's character was rather boring, she was a love interest, she didn't say anything. She wasn't a strong character, she was just there.

__________________

annabananalise

Yeah I wanted more development for broomhilda. Like django was going through all that for her, I wanted her to be this awesome character and not a prize to be won (a la jasmine).

Also: django could get it.

__________________
Last relaxer: 8.4.10
BC: 9.6.11

when will your favs?

iroc

I liked it. I thought it was very Tarantino. I expected the violence, and while it was long, I expected that too, bc it was a Tarantino film. I think the movie wasnt supposed to be about Broomhilda, so there wasnt room for more character development. I think we did know a lot about her character regardless.

I loved the Schultz character. I love Jamie Foxx and I'm glad he played the part instead of Wil Smith (who the part was originally written for but he was busy w Men in Black 3). At the end, the other slaves WERE free to go. The cage they were in was left open. Its up to them to make their own choice.

There are going to be some parts that are odd or unbelievable, thats how QT writes it. All of his films are a little weird.

And I love love love Leonardo DiCaprio. He is an absolutely amazing actor.


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using CurlTalk App

__________________

thelio

When I heard will smith was suppose to have the role, I just couldn't see him doing it. I love will and think he's an awesome actor, I just can't see him doing a QT film yet.

scrills

I think Jamie was great in the role. Not sure I can see Will in the role.

I think it was OK not to see more Broomhilda. Her cry faces were enough (sorry)

Thanks Iroc, I was trying to remember if the cage was open. I agree that wordy response like the doc's wasn't needed, but a nice Django gesture to them would have been nice

iroc

I only remember bc during that scene I was thinking 'isnt he going to let them out??' And when they panned back, the cage was open.

I think during the dog scene, the point was Django was going there for his wife specifically. He didnt want to risk using that chance to save someone else.

But I agree that I was waiting for something to happen there. Generally movie people are way smarter/deeper than I, so I usually expect to miss some meaning in scenes.

Again, I loved the dentist character. I was sad to see him die, but I really loved Djangos last word to him.

I do not like Kerry Washington so I wasn't upset at her lack of presence in the movie.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using CurlTalk App

__________________