- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Just got back from seeing Django Unchained
Posted on 12/26/12 at 7:19 pm to Baloo
Posted on 12/26/12 at 7:19 pm to Baloo
quote:
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.
but for how shaken he was and for how profound of an effect it had on him, it didn't seem to bug him much until it was dramatically suitable. he still executed the plan to a T, and the only frickup was by django's wife (not shultz)
quote:
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.
by that point in time it was already clear that candie was an idiot and stephen was the HNIC (house negro in charge). from his introduction until his death, nothing changed in that regard
quote:
He is using the slick form of his early years to a more substantial purpose now.
i don't think this movie was shot very slick and he's becoming preachy and lost direction. QT is not a person who can do preachy, and i think the writing of this movie showed that. hell the interspliced absurd comedy showed he wasn't comfortable with going "all in"
1
Posted on 12/26/12 at 7:35 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
but for how shaken he was and for how profound of an effect it had on him, it didn't seem to bug him much until it was dramatically suitable. he still executed the plan to a T, and the only frickup was by django's wife (not shultz)
He begs to stop it, offers to buy the man's freedom, explicitly stating his life is worth $500. He argues with Django about playing the character too well. And his reaction is a topic of conversation.
How much of a reaction do you want? Fireworks? Would you like Tarantino to walk out in front of the action and explain this scene is important. He practically did. It wasn't subtle.
quote:
by that point in time it was already clear that candie was an idiot and stephen was the HNIC
Candie was not an idiot. He's vain and a poseur, but he is not dumb. He is not portrayed that why either, and he does pick up on Schultz's doubts.
quote:
i don't think this movie was shot very slick and he's becoming preachy and lost direction.
I thought it was well shot, playing up the dirty nature of both the west and the south. Then the pristine nature of the plantation itself. An important contrast. But yes, if indicting slavery as evil (and the Nazis as being bad) is getting too preachy then, yes, guilty as charged. But those are rather easy targets and should be condemned. Unless you're just mad its your ox getting gored.
It's an ox that deserves goring.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News