| Author |
|
ms_wonderland 
Elite Member
Joined: Apr 05 2009
Location: TTT
Status: Offline
Points: 165745
|
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote  Reply
 Posted: Dec 26 2012 at 12:14am |
|
Is this movie the reason why BET has been running Roots the past few days?
|
 |
|
Sponsored Links
|
|
|
EPITOME
Platinum Member
Joined: Feb 08 2007
Location: Escarpin
Status: Offline
Points: 380739
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Dec 26 2012 at 12:31am |
|
u know maybe i won't see it... i rather see the Tyler Perry movie...QT does go overboard with the violence...it's why I never saw Kill Bill
|
|
Alias_Avi
Elite Member
Joined: Oct 10 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 162751
|
Post Options
Thanks(1)
Quote Reply
Posted: Dec 26 2012 at 12:43am |
I just realized that the KKK didn't even exist back in the slave era of 1835 
|
|
kkscottdale
Elite Member
Joined: Mar 30 2008
Location: ATL
Status: Offline
Points: 35492
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Dec 26 2012 at 1:19am |
 Alias_Avi wrote:
Okay, I’m back
Here are my thoughts…
If I was a huge Quentin Tarintino fan and if I wasn’t
educated, a conscious thinker and Black (or White), I probably would have loved
this film… probably would have even called it a “masterpiece”
The gun slinging, horse-ridding, cracka killing, slave
revenge fantasy was in full effect! Equipped with your typical Tarintino style
Western backdrop juxtaposed to slave-era take on a blackploitation plot.
The acting was quality and so was the plot but I most definitely have gripes with a few
things…
One being… it’s yet another White Hero movie. Ugh!!!
White Americans cannot, for the life of themselves, create a
freaking movie on the evils of slavery, Jim
Crow, the Civil Rights movement without freaking sticking a damn White Hero in
as the main damn character. Make no mistake, he was the MAIN CHARACTER! Jamie
Foxx serves only as the secondary main character (if there is such thing, I
think QT might have created this new role with this movie)
Two… why are all the most likeable characters (as in funny/well-acted/most
interesting) white???? Sigh.
From the bounty hunter, plantation owners, and plantation
owner’s wife to the damn KKK (it’s hard to hate a character/villain that you
laugh at, right?)
Jamie Foxx had the most redeemable Black character. Every
other Black character was humiliating with no agency/purpose/dept to justify
the rancid humiliation. All of them seemed soulless, submissive, down-right
undignified individuals who had little to no emotions (easier to hate in comparison
to the grotesquely goofy and ungroomed White idiots). One could make the argument
that that’s how Blacks seemed back in those days and my point is that that’s
why this movie was typical. Show me a movie on slavery that humanizes these
dehumanized souls in the way they deserved. I’d take that any day over a White
hero that gives a Black man a gun to kill other Whities.
Why was the worst villain of all, in this movie, Samuel L
Jackson’s Uncle Ruckus-in-flesh, minstrel show character? Why was his character
so extra????
I mean, it was too much. Just way too cartoonish, felt fake. I feel like he had
more lines than Django himself
Even worst, the most obvious underlying tone of this movie
(which I predicted) was the “why didn’t them slaves just up and kill YT? Cuz
they stoopid submissive Brothas! That’s why!” message.
It’s as if Quentin was saying with this film “Well, if I was
a slave I would have done THIS” which is such a pompous and arrogant way to
approach this complicated history
|
I just finished watching the movie and the bolded is what I thought too. It was like an underlying lesson to black people that I know most of the white people in the movie theater agreed with.
|
|
foxyroy19
Elite Member
Joined: Apr 08 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 34509
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Dec 26 2012 at 1:20am |
|
Interesting take Alias.
|
|
kkscottdale
Elite Member
Joined: Mar 30 2008
Location: ATL
Status: Offline
Points: 35492
|
Post Options
Thanks(2)
Quote Reply
Posted: Dec 26 2012 at 1:31am |
|
Here are my thoughts after finishing the movie.
I loved Kill Bill, therefore, I didn't mind QT's use of senseless gore.
What I did mind was the constant use of ni99a. Sometimes, it just wasn't needed. I cringed more when Jaime did it to be honest. However, it could be argued that the constant use of the word is to make the movie more realistic *shrug*
Leonardo did an excellent job at his role and I can understand why he may get many nominations because he did well, even when he didn't use the word *ni99a*.
Samuel L. Jackson as the slavemaster's Uncle Tom was soooo annoying! Sometimes, he wasn't even funny.
I think white people in the audience just loved to laugh at the mere sound of "ni99a" because not everything was funny.
This movie made me more aware(although I already was) of how blacks were so close to whites, hating them but still wanting to be more like them at the same time. Their entire self-worth was tied into how whites viewed them.
Movies like this does make light of slavery but no body wants to watch Goodbye Uncle Tom. That's too raw for America.
|
|
honeyb87
Platinum Member
Joined: Sep 10 2006
Location: ATL
Status: Offline
Points: 33489
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Dec 26 2012 at 1:31am |
Alias_Avi wrote:
Okay, I’m back
Here are my thoughts…
If I was a huge Quentin Tarintino fan and if I wasn’t
educated, a conscious thinker and Black (or White), I probably would have loved
this film… probably would have even called it a “masterpiece”
The gun slinging, horse-ridding, cracka killing, slave
revenge fantasy was in full effect! Equipped with your typical Tarintino style
Western backdrop juxtaposed to slave-era take on a blackploitation plot.
The acting was quality and so was the plot but I most definitely have gripes with a few
things…
One being… it’s yet another White Hero movie. Ugh!!!
White Americans cannot, for the life of themselves, create a
freaking movie on the evils of slavery, Jim
Crow, the Civil Rights movement without freaking sticking a damn White Hero in
as the main damn character. Make no mistake, he was the MAIN CHARACTER! Jamie
Foxx serves only as the secondary main character (if there is such thing, I
think QT might have created this new role with this movie)
Two… why are all the most likeable characters (as in funny/well-acted/most
interesting) white???? Sigh.
From the bounty hunter, plantation owners, and plantation
owner’s wife to the damn KKK (it’s hard to hate a character/villain that you
laugh at, right?)
Jamie Foxx had the most redeemable Black character. Every
other Black character was humiliating with no agency/purpose/dept to justify
the rancid humiliation. All of them seemed soulless, submissive, down-right
undignified individuals who had little to no emotions (easier to hate in comparison
to the grotesquely goofy and ungroomed White idiots). One could make the argument
that that’s how Blacks seemed back in those days and my point is that that’s
why this movie was typical. Show me a movie on slavery that humanizes these
dehumanized souls in the way they deserved. I’d take that any day over a White
hero that gives a Black man a gun to kill other Whities.
Why was the worst villain of all, in this movie, Samuel L
Jackson’s Uncle Ruckus-in-flesh, minstrel show character? Why was his character
so extra????
I mean, it was too much. Just way too cartoonish, felt fake. I feel like he had
more lines than Django himself
Even worst, the most obvious underlying tone of this movie
(which I predicted) was the “why didn’t them slaves just up and kill YT? Cuz
they stoopid submissive Brothas! That’s why!” message.
It’s as if Quentin was saying with this film “Well, if I was
a slave I would have done THIS” which is such a pompous and arrogant way to
approach this complicated history
|
Despite me agreeing 100% with everything you said (minus describing
people who liked this movie as non educated), I let it slide for the
sake of the sheer ambiance and entertainment. I like movies that are
controversial and able to ruffle people's feathers *shrugs* Sam's
character was pretty over the top. Yes, the premise is .....yet again..... the white guy responsible for taking a black guy under his wing to help
him get revenge on his oppressors. POSSIBLE SPOILER
The part with DiCaprio's character describing blacks as being submissive by nature based on the dents in their skull was cringe worthy. I have never heard any sh*t like that in my life. I thought it was yet another explanation for white people to use as a justification as to how they are superior over us.
Le sigh...
|
|
honeyb87
Platinum Member
Joined: Sep 10 2006
Location: ATL
Status: Offline
Points: 33489
|
Post Options
Thanks(1)
Quote Reply
Posted: Dec 26 2012 at 1:34am |
Alias_Avi wrote:
I just realized that the KKK didn't even exist back in the slave era of 1835
|
That was a huge anachronism.
|
|
honeyb87
Platinum Member
Joined: Sep 10 2006
Location: ATL
Status: Offline
Points: 33489
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Dec 26 2012 at 1:36am |
kkscottdale wrote:
Movies like this does make light of slavery but no body wants to watch Goodbye Uncle Tom. That's too raw for America.
|
They not ready for that. There is no white hero or fancy cinematography to draw people in.
|
|
Random Thoughts
Elite Member
Joined: Aug 10 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 68151
|
Post Options
Thanks(5)
Quote Reply
Posted: Dec 26 2012 at 1:39am |
Alias_Avi wrote:
I just realized that the KKK didn't even exist back in the slave era of 1835
|
The movie takes place in 1858. About 10 years give or take from the rise of the first klan in the south. It's not unfathomable that the midnight rides were taking place before then.
|
|
Tweet
Topic Options
