Django Unchained - Part 2

[DarthSkywalker]

Were you asleep during the movie? Hildy was a slave until everyone was dead. Candie's bill of sell was not legit without the handshake, because Candie would have appealed it in court and would have won due to local support. He also told his man to kill them if Schultz didn't shake his hand. Then after Schultz killed Candie Django and Hildy became criminals for aiding and abetting a man who killed a local plantation honor. I'm not sure if you are aware of this, but when Shultz killed Candie he enlsaved Django and Hildy again hence why he said "I'm sorry, but I couldn't resist."

That was a lot of hot air that became reality when Schultz decided he couldn't take Candie's crap anymore. But you do make a fair point right here which is why Schultz's actions are so wrong. He talks about helping him get his wife back but can't swallow Candie's crap for a few more moments. He could have come back if he really needed to kill him.

Also not sure on the still slave thing. Think he had the bills of sale. Thought that is why they made such a big deal. Theoretically all Django had to do was come back, get Hildy and head north. I find it odd that Django's actions at Candyland at the end had no blow back. He made a spectacle out of it. Surely that would have drawn more attention.

Now that I think about it, not exact sure why he had to kill the lawyer who did nothing but actually help him and Schultz. Won't his associates wonder what happened to him?

 

[DarthSkywalker]

My point was stephen's idea or not, he was a slave she should have not gone with any plan from a slave had she not agreed with it herself. Which she did which makes he as culpable as stephen in that regards.

So that goes to your other point of the 13 year old. She wasn't an innocent 13 year old girl, she was an adult women who had no qualms about slavery or the horrible actions her brother took to treat his slaves and whether it was her idea or not. She signed off on what would have been the slow painful death warrant on django.

So she made her own deathbed when it came to what happened with django.

My point is she had every right considering what happened in her house.

As to her not being innocent my point is to the idea that they would hunt him down because of her. If that is a line of thought as to why he killed everyone, then her age makes no difference.

It is similar to the scene in Kill Bill when Beatrix is confronted with Vernita's daughter.

 

[Marvolo]

That was a lot of hot air that became reality when Schultz decided he couldn't take Candie's crap anymore. But you do make a fair point right here which is why Schultz's actions are so wrong. He talks about helping him get his wife back but can't swallow Candie's crap for a few more moments. He could have come back if he really needed to kill him.

Also not sure on the still slave thing. Think he had the bills of sale. Thought that is why they made such a big deal. Theoretically all Django had to do was come back, get Hildy and head north. I find it odd that Django's actions at Candyland at the end had no blow back. He made a spectacle out of it. Surely that would have drawn more attention.

Now that I think about it, not exact sure why he had to kill the lawyer who did nothing but actually help him and Schultz. Won't his associates wonder what happened to him?

You should really read up on the South its laws and history during that time. A bill of sale was only useful if the local courts knew of it and upheld it which would be unlikely if a powerful white plantation owner started throwing his money and power around. Until Django and Hilldy were out of the South they ran the risk of being reenslaved regardless of bll of sale. A slaver or anyone for that matter could pick them up destroy the bill of sale and no white man would argue. The bill of sale is for the benefit of the North so the South can't come up there and take them back. Now when Schultz did the dumb thing of killing Candie he made the Bill of Sale null and Void because no white judge would consider that sale legit. It just isn't how things ran in the Deep South at that time.

And Django had to kill everyone because with Candie being murdered the surviving members were within their "legal rights" of the time to hunt down Django and Hildy and bring them back for "justice". And that is assuming Django and Hilldy could make it out of the house with the Bill of Sale after Candie was killed which as you can see they couldn't. Because of the laws of the time and the record keeping and the fact that the Bill of Sale had just been made, the moment Candie was killed Stephen or anyone in that house would have destroyed the Bill of Sale and done whatever the wanted to to Django and Hildy. There would have been no outside record that Hildy had ever been sold. Django being a black man with no papers from Schultz showing he was free man would have been treated by the local courts as a runaway and you can imagine what that would mean for him.

If you want to blame anyone be my guest and blame Schultz, because he entirely screwd Django and Hildy over. The entire last third was Django reacting to a situation Schultz put him in.

 

[Bruce Malone]

My point is she had every right considering what happened in her house.

As to her not being innocent my point is to the idea that they would hunt him down because of her. If that is a line of thought as to why he killed everyone, then her age makes no difference.

It is similar to the scene in Kill Bill when Beatrix is confronted with Vernita's daughter.

and based on what happened in her house django had every right for his actions as well. Django probably wouldn't have killed her if she was a child. Again if you recall it was django who recoiled at the idea of even killing a man next to his child, not schultz i should point out.

Regardless you're grasping at straws at this point if you're clinging to random hypotheticals. It seems you have some personal issue with the character of django himself and if you just didn't like the character there's nothing more than can be really debated. The sister was not an innocent and she had reasons to be taken out, case closed.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

You should really read up on the South its laws and history during that time. A bill of sale was only useful if the local courts upheld it which would be unlikely if a powerful white plantation owner starts throwing his money and power around. Until Django and Hilldy were out of the South they ran the risk of being reenslaved regardless of bll of sale. A slaver or anyone for that matter could pick them up destroy the bill of sale and no white man would argue. The bill of sale is for the benefit of the North so the South can't come up there and take them back. Now when Schultz did the dumb thing of killing Candie he made the Bill of Sale null and Void because no white judge would consider that sale legit. It just isn't hw things ran in the Deep South at that time. If you want to blame anyone be my guest and blame Schultz, because he entirely scred Django and Hildy over.

Does this not still hold true after he kills everyone though? It is easy to say that if he kills everyone there, well everyone not black save for Stephen, that he won't face trouble heading North, but how realistic is that after what he did?

I have read a lot of Civil War literature. I only prefer the Revolution to it when it comes to American History. I am not arguing against the wrongs of slavery. I am arguing that complicity does not equal right to murder. You could start talking about the rights of women in this situation. If you are going to say they had to do what they had to do to survive, that doesn't change the nature of what Django did. It is a question of what you are willing to do to survive and what kind of person that makes you. It is a bit of a Heart of Darkness/Lord of the Flies question.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

and based on what happened in her house django had every right for his actions as well. Django probably wouldn't have killed her if she was a child. Again if you recall it was django who recoiled at the idea of even killing a man next to his child, not schultz i should point out.

Regardless you're grasping at straws at this point if you're clinging to random hypotheticals. It seems you have some personal issue with the character of django himself and if you just didn't like the character there's nothing more than can be really debated. The sister was not an innocent and she had reasons to be taken out, case closed.

It was also Django who let a man get eaten to death. Django wasn't that waif anymore.

And just stating "there were reasons to take her out" is exactly my point. It is easy to say she can die because Django is the main character with his noble purist, not taking into account anything that happened.

Every reason has a hole in it, but that doesn't really matter. By the way, liked Django.

 

[Marvolo]

Does this not still hold true after he kills everyone though? It is easy to say that if he kills everyone there, well everyone not black save for Stephen, that he won't face trouble heading North, but how realistic is that after what he did?

I have read a lot of Civil War literature. I only prefer the Revolution to it when it comes to American History. I am not arguing against the wrongs of slavery. I am arguing that complicity does not equal right to murder. You could start talking about the rights of women in this situation. If you are going to say they had to do what they had to do to survive, that doesn't change the nature of what Django did. It is a question of what you are willing to do to survive and what kind of person that makes you. It is a bit of a Heart of Darkness question.

Oh there is no doubt that Django would have been imprisoned if the North ever got wind of what he did in the South. Django was not within the law of the time. I'm not saying that. What I'm saying is that we as viewers see the whole picture and realize that what Django was doing was out of necessity. We can see that he had no choice. Given the laws of the time after Schultz shot Candie his only options were allow himself be killed then and there or try to fight his way out of the house. There was no option of just walking out of the house so he fought. Once he was cornered in the house his only options were to be taken to the slave camp and worked to death while his wife faced horrors or escape and return to the plantation, take Hildy, and escape to the North. He could have just come back for Hildy and escaped into the night, no doubt, but the work camp would have been looking for their men and came to the plantation enquiring. Then they would have found out Django killed the men and escaped. Stephen would have told them all about Django and the work camp men would have hunted him down. This left Django one option. Kill everyone who saw him on the plantation thereby removing anyone who knows anything about him and Hildy. He would become like a ghost. This is also why he killed all the rednecks in the cabin. If he wanted him and Hildy to have any chance of living the rest of their lives and avoid slavery or prison he had to kill everyone who saw him and Schultz on the plantation.

Had Schultz not shot Candie they could have walked off that plantation and been free people to live out their lives. But I don't think anyone actually thinks Candie was going to let them walk off that plantation. Even if Schultz had shook his hand and they had got out the front door Candie's mean would have caught them on the road and killed them. Candie wasn't a man to be trifled with and Schultz nearly made a fool out of him. Really they were all screwed the minute Stephen got suspicious. After that it was just dominos falling forcing Django into a worse and worse situation. The final third of this film is a great representation of Murphy's Law.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Oh there is no doubt that Django would have been imprisoned if the North ever got wind of what he did in the South. Django was not within the law of the time. I'm not saying that. What I'm saying is that we as viewers see the whole picture and realize that what Django was doing was out of necessity. We can see that he had no choice. Given the laws of the time after Schultz shot Candie his only options were allow himself be killed then and there or try to fight his way out of the house. Once that didn't work his only options were to be taken to the slave camp and worked to death while his wife faced horrors or kill everyone and escape to the North. Given the times once Django killed everyone and blew up the house there would be no way to connect him to the murders or the crimes so he would be in the clear. This is also why he killed all the rednecks in the cabin. If he wanted him and Hildy to have any chance of living the rest of their lives and avoid slavery or prison he had to kill everyone who saw him and Schultz on the plantation.

Had Schultz not shot Candie they could have walked off that plantation and been free people to live out their lives. But I don't think anyone actually thinks Candie was going to let them walk off that plantation. Even if Schultz had shook his hand and they had got out the front door Candie's mean would have caught them on the road and killed them. Candie wasn't a man to be trifled with and Schultz nearly made a fool out of him. Really they were all screwed the minute Stephen got suspicious. After that it was just dominos falling forcing Django into worse and worse situation. The final third of this film is a great representation of Murphy's Law.

I am not sure if what Django did meant he couldn't identify. A lot of people back in town and even some slaves who might have given him up for one reason or another, but it does make sense from a pure survival perspective and I haven't ever denied that. Probably should have killed the slaves he let walk that saw his face to if you are considering that, but it is the morality that Tarantino as created. In a grey world, everything is played as black and white. It is like the sympathic contract killer or murdering military psychopaths.

On Candie letting them leave, I agree it seems a bit iffy. However, I actually think he would have let them leave. Schultz's reaction combined with Candie's desire for the handshake makes me think that was what Tarantino was going for. Candie would have probably preferred that idea of Schultz living a life where he knows he was bested by Candie.

 

[Marvolo]

I am not sure if what Django did meant he couldn't identify. A lot of people back in town and even some slaves who might have given him up for one reason or another, but it does make sense from a pure survival perspective and I haven't ever denied that. Probably should have killed the slaves he let walk that saw his face to if you are considering that, but it is the morality that Tarantino as created. In a grey world, everything is played as black and white. It is like the sympathic contract killer or murdering military psychopaths.

On Candie letting them leave, I agree it seems a bit iffy. However, I actually think he would have let them leave. Schultz's reaction combined with Candie's desire for the handshake makes me think that was what Tarantino was going for. Candie would have probably preferred that idea of Schultz living a life where he knows he was bested by Candie.

Yep. Candie was enjoying every minute of that. It was aggravating the piss out of me in the theater so I can't say I don't sympathize with Schultz. I would have shown more restraint at that moment, but I would have made it my mission to see that Candie got his in the future. We can never know whether Candie would have let them live. I don't think he would have, but I guess it isn't really relevant in the end, because Schultz removed it from the equation of things when he impulsively shot Candie and created the whole cluster****. To be fair to Schultz tho, he was prepared to leave Candie's plantation and not shoot him. Candie kept insisting on rubbing his face in the mud with the handshake. So Candie brought that on himself when he thought just because he was in a house of armed men that Schultz wouldn't kill him. It's definitely a film with lots of grey areas with everyone acting in some shady, foolish ways. Pride and every other sin is clearly on display. Its one of my favorite thing about QT films. The characters are flawed.

 

[the last son]

Good arguments in here. Have to agree with everything Marvolo is saying. Some of the other stuff just makes you shake your head.

 

[marty mcfly]

Cool movie.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

People are taking this movie too seriously. It is an extreme representation of spaghetti westerns and blaxploitation flicks. Almost a parody, and it is certainly comedic in tone. It has more in common with Blazing Saddles than Once Upon a Time in the West. Lara died the way she did because it was funny. Nothing more.

 

[kedrell]

Well it's nice to see more people now agreeing that Schultz killing Candie was a really dumb move on Schultz's part. And considering how smart he'd seemed to be for the rest of the film it just struck me as out of character for the sake of the plot. Even on the way to Candyland Schultz took Django aside and clearly said that he had no intention or desire to die in Chickisaw County, Mississippi, USA.

 

[Bruce Malone]

Well it's nice to see more people now agreeing that Schultz killing Candie was a really dumb move on Schultz's part. And considering how smart he'd seemed to be for the rest of the film it just struck me as out of character for the sake of the plot. Even on the way to Candyland Schultz took Django aside and clearly said that he had no intention or desire to die in Chickisaw County, Mississippi, USA.

We covered this debate earlier but yes it was a dumb plot that was totally in line with schulz chracter however. In terms of creating almost needlessly elaborate plots just so he has the upper hand the whole time.

The plot had to fail for the story but it was not out of character when you look at the first plot with schultz and django trying to reel the sherrif in. Instead of going up to the marshall in the first place and telling him who he is and who his sheriff really is. He creates a situation where he has the whole town turn guns on him just so he can make his grand declaration in front of them all. He's a showman who like complicated plots for relatively un-complicated situations.

 

[Rum Runner]

It wasn't Schultz going out of character for the sake of the story. It was Schultz, the character, finally losing his cool, finally snapping. He hates slavery obviously, but he is always having to keep up this facade so he can charm his way close to his targets.

Well his experiences with Candie, the dog attack in particular? Well, he just couldn't keep up the act any more. He snapped. It's a human response.

That's why i love this film, and Tarantino's other works. His films are absurd and trangressive. Almost dream like. But they are filled with real human emotions that totally ring true. I think my favourite part of this film was when Schultz was with Hildi, saying someone is there to see her. And you can see on her face she's thinking "Django? No it can't be!" and she's getting all excited and nervous.

Brilliant stuff. This is Tarantino's best since Jackie Brown, easily.

 

[LostSon88]

Schultz had an ego as well...like he said, he couldn't resist and just let Candie shine him on like that.

It was impulsive. Which given how methodical Schultz actions were throughout the movie, made it all the more shocking.

In the end, he had just as much of bravado and ego as Candie and was unwilling to let up.

Still think he was a great character though and sucked that he died.

 

[Marvolo]

Schultz had an ego as well...like he said, he couldn't resist and just let Candie shine him on like that.

It was impulsive. Which given how methodical Schultz actions were throughout the movie, made it all the more shocking.

In the end, he had just as much of bravado and ego as Candie and was unwilling to let up.

Still think he was a great character though and sucked that he died.

It definitely sucked and throughout the ensuing shootout I couldnt help but think about Schultz dead on the floor. Gone just like that.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

This movie was absolutely fantastic. Best movie of the year, as far as I'm concerned. And aside from the brutal and dramatic scenes, it also had a nice dose of comedy that was genuinely hilarious, like Bill Sharp's Death, the KKK scene, Django's comment to Leo(Calvin's Lawyer) on the stairs, and the, "Bye, Miss Laura." scene. I mean, I knew it was going to be good, but this movie really surprised me by how marvelous it actually was. Candie is the villain of the year and Schultz is the badass of the year. Django goes down as the hero of the year for me.

Django Unchained is an instant classic. Really makes me pumped up to see what movies 2013 has in store.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

Of course Schultz shot Candie. Do you honestly think that Calvin would have just let them walk out of there after they made him out to be a fool? Schultz knew that a simple handshake wasn't going to ensure their survival, so he just said f*** it and shot Candie before Candie could do anything to him or order Butch to shoot Django and Broomhilda. The plan was going to fail regardless of a handshake or not, because Calvin had already found them out at that point and no one was safe.

 

[Marvolo]

Of course Schultz shot Candie. Do you honestly think that Calvin would have just let them walk out of there after they made him out to be a fool? Schultz knew that a simple handshake wasn't going to ensure their survival, so he just said f*** it and shot Candie before Candie could do anything to him or order Butch to shoot Django and Broomhilda. The plan was going to fail regardless of a handshake or not, because Calvin had already found them out at that point and no one was safe.

Yeah, like I said their plan went to **** the moment Stephen got suspicious.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

Yeah, like I said their plan went to **** the moment Stephen got suspicious.

Yeah, Stephen was the true mastermind of the operation. I'm surprised he didn't notice that Django and Broomhilda both had matching r's on their faces.

 

[the last son]

I don't care what anyone says. I thought Jamie Foxx was fantastic. Any chance that a sequel would be made? Would love to see how their story ends.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Yeah, Stephen was the true mastermind of the operation. I'm surprised he didn't notice that Django and Broomhilda both had matching r's on their faces.

That scene in the library where Stephen displays his power over Candie is my favorite of the movie. It is a fascinating relationship.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

That scene in the library where Stephen displays his power over Candie is my favorite of the movie. It is a fascinating relationship.

I loved that scene. Stephen's posture straightened, his eyes sharpened, and he even spoke in a slightly different tone. Calvin was like a naive child in front of Stephen.

 

[the last son]

That was a good scene. While watching the movie I was disappointed Django was not the one to take out Candie