Started By
Message

re: Just got back from seeing Django Unchained

Posted on 12/26/12 at 7:17 pm to
Posted by Rittdog
Yesterday, all my troubles seemed
Member since Oct 2009
9955 posts
Posted on 12/26/12 at 7:17 pm to
quote:

I disagree. There is a lot of Hans in Schultz's character, and I think that is incredibly intentional. What we saw as psychotic and evil in a Nazi is suddenly zany and comedic in a character we like. I think that's an intentional choice by Tarantino and Waltz, showing how perspective changes things -- and to show Schultz is not a whimsical character. We walk into this movie with the baggage of IB. Tarantino has always played on his audience's knowledge of his films. I see no reason why he would stop now.

That said, given his nature, he is a killer, not a slaver or torturer. And the dog scene's impact on Schultz cannot be understated. It's why we cut back to it later in the film. It has shaken Schultz to his core. He is a man of violence and also one who exploits the law to his advantage. But this is an evil far beyond even him. It's not just a man was torn apart by dogs, it's that it was completely legal and totally unneccessary. He can morally justify killing criminals, but he cannot justify killing and torturing the innocent. It is the bridge too far.

Even then, he's willing to pay the cash and just get out of there, but it's when Candie pushes the point and demands he shake his nad. To treat him as a gentleman and an equal. It is something he cannot abide. And so he steps outside the law, while regaining a moral good. He kills criminals -- the deserving. And here is a man even more vile, so he must be killed as well.


As for Stephen... I can't believe anyone would call Jackson's performance one note. Seriously, you forsaw the scene with him sitting in the library swirling brandy in the snifter? Because I sure as hell didn't. There's being the brains behind the operation, and then there's what Stephen was.

I don't think this was quite as good as Basterds, which I think was Tarantino's masterpiece. But for a guy five years ago I thought had completely lost his way as a director, I think Tarantino's "middle period" is shaping up to be the equal of any man's peak. He is using the slick form of his early years to a more substantial purpose now. He's living up to all of his early promise.

It just took him 20 years to get there. Bravo. This movie is amazing.
:bow: :bow:
Posted by Rittdog
Yesterday, all my troubles seemed
Member since Oct 2009
9955 posts
Posted on 12/26/12 at 7:19 pm to
From another board to add to the discussion about Stephen not being one note and other points.

quote:

The point which was aptly conveyed in several scenes that apparently went over your head, is that the slaves were attuned to the inner lives of the other slaves as well as to the lives of whites, especially if they lived in the big house. Whites were not attuned to the slaves. They were too busy assuming their own superiority (the long scene about the dimples at the back of the skull).. They thought they knew but they didnt. The other part of it was that some slaves were able to fool and manipuate their owners by using their feelings of superiority against them. Since blacks were so dumb and stupid it wouldn't occur to the whites they were actually being played.

They discussed their business right in front of the slaves. The slaves acted and revealed only that which whites expected and the minimum of what they needed to know. The uncle tom character of Sam (who was depicted as being trusted enough and literate enough to tend the books) showed that some blacks learned to curry favor with their owners and therefore make an easier life for themseleves. A lot of things he did was to get over. The laughing at every joke, negative statements about the other slaves, seemingly subjegating himself to the masters. He even got away with insulting them right their faces with a laugh. His contempt for whites and his boss was conveyed when he came to tell DJango what fate lay awaitiing him. He basically said the whites were too stupid to figure out what to do with him. He interjected several times suggestions which they ignored because what would some dumb slave know, until the sister came up with the exact idea he had fed the whites.

The other scene which conveyed his feelings of superiority over his masters was when he threw down his cane, stood up straight, walked straight and started talking with less of an "ignorant" way of speaking during the last scenes when Django returned for revenge. In other words he had played up his age and fragilities to his bosses to get away with a lot and make a better life for himself. Some of his (and others like him) comtempt for the other slaves was real because he felt they were stupid to keep trying to escape only to be brought back and be beaten over and over. He felt he had figured out how best to cope and make the best of a bad deal as the other slaves had not. He got to live in the big house, eat the better food, hear all the gossip and what whites folks were up to, and in time even get to insult the whites, and feel superior to them.

For me, the reveal was a major scene and many scenes had been played to build that scene up and to reflect back on that scene. He could actually tell his white boss to meet him in the library. Sit there and sip the same liquor has his owner as and equal and his boss didn't even notice it. And, yes, he was willing to do what he needed (including throwing his own people under the bus) to keep his position. No different than a corporate raider or any captain of industry in this day and age. In other words he was ruthless.


This post was edited on 12/26/12 at 7:20 pm
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram