To: Red Badger
Django is pure porn for black racists and self-loathing white liberals...but so what? It's a fun movie and nothing like it ever happened.
It's like “The Confessions of Nat Turner” which made a hate filled evil mass murderer of innocent white civilians some kind of freedom fighter...both a good read and a good laugh.
posted on 01/23/2013 11:05:53 AM PST
by Happy Rain
("Banning guns over Adam Lanza would be like banning speech over Bill Maher.")
To: Happy Rain; SWAMPSNIPER
Regardless of the movie’s artistic quality, the point is that Django could not have done what he did without the use of personal guns. Unintended consequences? Maybe Tarantino is a secret gun nut?........
posted on 01/23/2013 11:09:01 AM PST
by Red Badger
(Lincoln freed the slaves. Obama just got them ALL back......................)
To: Happy Rain
Did not need to see Fox’s junk in another man’s hand. It was ok otherwise. That said, I’m not sure how many rotten tomatoes or thumbs up I saw.
posted on 01/23/2013 12:03:46 PM PST
(The Ameritopian Motto: Gov The Sheeple, Buy The Sheeple, Bore The Sheeple)
To: Happy Rain
Django Unchained actually had an interesting plot to begin with, if it had been developed properly and not used simply as an excuse to show all the mean things that white slave owners may or may not have done to slaves. The intricate plot to rescue Django's wife was fairly tense and interesting right up until all of the goofy shootout scenes.
However, the focus of the movie was most obviously NOT the plot - it was revenge porn for blacks, just as you say. And Tarantino's ignorant butt couldn't even be bothered to do even the most basic research into the period. A couple of things that stood out as especially annoying:
1) the movie portrayed the plantation owner (played by Leonardo) as having the same white-trash bad grammar as all of the toothless rednecks that constituted the rest of the caucasian characters (and none of those accents were even close to being real), when in truth, such a wealthy child of plantation owners would have been highly educated and would have spoken the Queen's English, albeit with a deep drawl.
2) These same genteel southern plantation owners would never, NEVER, have spoken openly about sex with slave girls in front of the (white) lady of the house, nor would she have tolerated it if they had, any more than a guy these days would come home from a strip bar and tell his wife/girlfriend about all the hot ass he saw.
3) Django, being a field slave his whole life, would have had a pattern of speech so bad that it would have been nearly unintelligible to most of us, instead of the relatively polished speech of Foxx. Heck, black people in Missisippi NOW have a pattern of speech that is nearly unintelligible to most of the rest of the country. Foxx did a horrible job of convincing anyone that he was ever a slave. Maybe he's just a horrible actor.
All of you avid historians, feel free to tell me where I'm wrong.
posted on 01/23/2013 12:56:41 PM PST
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson