It seems that many people do not find this very ironic high-level joke. I would say that the whole film is about killing, whether it's killing white people who are found guilty or killing white people who don't seem to be guilty (the manor's sister), it's all about killing. And it's bound to cause unease to the audience, and it's likely to cause unease to specific ethnic groups with racist plots, and even to white people who are otherwise unbiased against minorities. They will think: Why should a black man be abused to kill so many innocent white people? !
However, in the whole film, Quentin did not make any explanation for the "injustice" he objectively showed in the film. Indifferent, arrogant, and gives the prejudiced a feeling of I dont give a fuck on how you think (although non-racially prejudiced people may also feel that the plot is unjust, I agree). but! But he made a solemn statement for the most insignificant animals in the whole film, horses, and the injuries they suffered in the plot, and even invited the Animal Protection Association to supervise the scene. This has to make me feel as follows:
1. The United States as a society is indeed much more advanced than China in animal protection. In terms of human rights and freedom of media and freedom of the media (if this film was made in China, for example, in the late Qing Dynasty when the Han resisted the oppression of the Manchus but killed many innocent Manchus), it would definitely be perfected by the State Administration of Radio, Film and Television in the name of "destroying national harmony" Banned, if the plot is designed in reverse, it will not only be banned by the official, but also condemned by the imperialists), the producers of a film with racial hatred (although it is anti-racist) are worried Not to offend racists, but to offend animal rights. All I can say is: I laughed!
2. The whole film is not like the superficial and disgusting totalitarian domestic revolutionary films that tell us: the oppressed people, no matter how uneducated, will support their liberators. Then, with no experience and relevant education, become a fighter for democracy and treat all mankind kindly. People's War! The masses of the people will definitely support the revolutionaries! On the contrary, this film goes the route of Lu Xun (or did Lu Xun draw similar historical experience?), telling: when slaves see their companions (that is, our Django) riding horses, most uneducated slaves , those walking niggas, looking at him with hate, like saying: FUCK he's the same color as me, why can he ride like my white master while I'm here in shackles walking? !
correct! Dear people, when a slave sees his own kind become prosperous, do you think that the first thing that appears is heartfelt admiration and blessings for the success of his kind? ! It is jealousy, even hatred, at the expense of strangling their lucky fellows. Because his feelings of injustice (he can and I can't) triumph over his feelings of hope (he can, then so can I); because in the state of human savagery, the desire to compete to bring down the table outweighs the desire to cooperate and win . Is this human nature? I don't think so, I think it's a natural behavior of many people without human rights education. This is called mob sentiment, or populism. And I bet that in China, populism is rampant.
3. Leonardo's skill in acting as a villain is really divine. He is not on a par with him as a complex and good person who is different in his performances but has inner justice (such as Infernal Affairs), but is better than "pure good people" like Jack. Better, I think.
Write here for now. See what other social truths I can find in the future when I watch it a second time.
View more about Django Unchained reviews
