The Axiom Amnesia Theory
Episode 114: Django Won’t Unchain Your Brain
January 07, 2013
So many of our brains are in chains, and we cannot think beyond that which has been propagandized with us in mind. Many of the things that target us are not for our benefit, but rather are intended to provide economic gain for those who scheme to dupe us with the ultimate mind screw.
Blacks and others have been fooled into believing that the movie “Django Unchained” provides a little slice of vindication for slavery. The fact is that there was no Django. He is a fictional character that never existed. All that happened during slavery remains unchanged, as should the outrage over the institution itself. On this episode of The Axiom Amnesia Theory, Heit & Cheri perform an extensive review of the movie “Django Unchained.” If you are one of the people who believe that this is a must-see film, then you need to listen to this commentary.
Listen To The Axiom Amnesia Theory Now!
Click here for more episodes of The Axiom Amnesia Theory
Help to spread independent thinking and donate $5 now!
Segment 1
Discussion and review about the movie Django.
The movie was a disappointment, and it was not about slavery. Slavery was merely the backdrop that Tanretino exploits for his economic gain.
Heit & Cheri both liked Pulp Fiction, but Django Unchained was a failure in terms of the plot.
******SPOILER ALERT********
Discussion of the opening scene where the the slaves were walking in with cheesy music playing. It prepares the viewer for the mockery of the condition of slavery.
Before any words were spoken there was a caption that said 1858, two years before the Civil War. This is inaccurate because the war started in 1861.
Discussion about how the main characters, Dr. Schultz and Django meet. Schultz basically steals Django so that he can find who he’s hunting on bounty.
Discussion about Schultz saying that slaves are his witnesses. Slaves couldn’t be used as witnesses back then.
Discussion about Schultz handing a loaded gun to a slave to hold while he was doing something, yet the slave never turned the gun on him.
After Schultz stole Django, he told the remaining slaves that either they could kill their slavers or remain in bondage. The slaves killed the slavers. Here we have the white savior telling the slaves what would have been obvious to them.
Disussion about the fact that Schultz had a slave traveling with him after he stole Django from the slavers.
Discussion about Django picking out his own clothes. Of course, Tarantino had Django pick out a bright blue suit.
Schultz is a bounty hunter who promises to give Django money and his freedom if he helps to find three brothers who were on the plantation Django had been sold from.
Discussion about how the slavers were portrayed at the first plantation where Schultz and Django go looking for the three brothers. The slaves spoke in a silly high voice with worse than broken English. It was completely insulting and disrespectful to suppose that this is the way slaves spoke back then. It was over the top. The sounded extremely childlike.
This scene was actually a reminder of Pootie Tang pulling out his belt. It was actually that absurd!
The other thing this scene and the rest of the movie does is get the audience–especially Black people–to feel a level of vindication that never happened in real life.
Discussion that it was supposed to be a funny moment when Django says that he doesn’t know what the word positive means–such a common word. Tarantino actually stole this from Chris Rock. In his standup Never Scared, Chris Rock actually talks about the dilemma of a slave who could read:
Discussion about the fact that there were a lot of different things that Tarantino stole from other culturally significant Black films and other performances.
Discussion about the portrayal of the KKK as complete idiots, when we know that they were not completely stupid. This was supposed to capture the emotion that the KKK was stupid so people feel vindicated. Actually, among the KKK’s leaders were community leaders and people of high stature alongside the common racists.
Discussion about Schultz teaching Django about his wife’s German history–based on his recognition of her name as a German name. He is basically telling a history based on the name her slave masters gave her.
Discussion about the lack of depth in the Django characters.
Discussion about the fact that Django would never be able to go around apprehending and helping to kill white men back then without any repercussions.
Discussion about the use of Hip Hop music at points in the movie where Django is getting his “revenge” on white people. Furthermore, the choice of Rick Ross, an impersonator rapper who glorifies material excess was a real insult.
Discussion about all the women having permed hair and wigs in the movie.
Discussion about Kerry Washington’s portrayal of Django’s wife.
Discussion about a scene in the movie where the Black guy is the authority, telling the white guy what to do.
One of the messages of the movie was that Django would have to act and be like the murderous white characters in order to get his “revenge” in the end.
Discussion about people saying that Django’s wife was very intelligent. The only thing we really know about her is that she was taught German and was a bed wench. She may well have been smart, but the character didn’t have enough on-screen depth to make that determination.
Discussion about Schultz telling Django to play his part of the valet.
Discussion about the use of the word “nigger” over a hundred times in the movie. It was not really a big deal as people made it out to be.
Discussion about Kerry Washington’s brief nudity in the process of being tortured. It was apparently important to try to sexualize her in a slick way. Also recall that there was nudity at the beginning of Roots, but when there was sex, there was no nudity.
This movie was not culturally significant to Black people, despite the PR machine trying to make us believe it is so.
Discussion about another stolen part of the movie, which was taken from a scene in The Color Purple where Celie is about to cut Mista’s throat with a blade. The reference in Django is where they were talking about why didn’t the slave who used to shave his master cut his throat.
Discussion about the movie not being about the institution of slavery. It’s about trying to get the girl–Django’s wife. The goal is to free her.
Discussion about the part of the movie where DiCaprio’s character give a supposedly scientific explanation for why Blacks are inferior.
Discussion about the deal to buy Django’s wife back, which was thwarted when Schultz kills her owner because the owner asks to shake his hand. This is was totally out of character for Schultz, who had been an intelligent and calculating character thus far in the film.
Discussion about the situation that Django’s left in–one in which he is forced to kill all the white people in order to save himself. This was self defense, not revenge. He runs out of ammunition, and is convinced by Uncle Ruckus to give himself up.
In the next scene Uncle Ruckus tells Django that he is the one who convinced the white folks not to kill Django. Consequently, Django is en route to be transferred to another plantation. Django is able to talk himself out of the situation and then kills the slavers.
Discussion about how the slaves who were being transferred with Django stayed in the open cage and didn’t run after Django had killed the slavers.
In the end, Django goes back and kills everyone. The final character that he kills–the western’s arch enemy–is Uncle Ruckus. So his main enemy in the movie is another Black man!?! There is no way that this movie is about revenge on white folks. The implication of the Black man being Django’s ultimate enemy is very telling.
The movie grossed 93 million. The big winner is Tarantino, who struck up controversy in this film and made folks fall for the okie doke. He has all of these people talking about this as a culturally relevant salve movie, which it is not.
Discussion about Django as this super-Slave. He was a natural with a gun, a whip, a horse, and everything else he tried. Django is basically the creation of a Black hero for Black people by a white guy.
Discussion about Tarantino boosting himself to the level of a person who can speak with credence on Black issues. Foolishness!
Discussion about Spike Lee as a Black director who cannot get Black folks to see his films. He is giving social commentary from a Black perspective, but Blacks would prefer to receive their social commentary from non-Blacks.
Discussion about the lie that Spike Lee has issue with the use of “nigger” in the film.
Discussion about Tarantino’s disrespectful reference to Spike Lee as a “little guy” who has to buy a ticket to his film.
Why would people rather champion a fictional character, rather than a real person, like Nat Turner, who actually was a hero for the liberation of Blacks from forced servitude?
This movie would not have been able to be a big hit without the three Black stars who participated: Samuel L. Jackson, Jamie Foxx, and Kerry Washington. Each of these actors could and should have turned these roles down. They had the responsibility to portray Blacks in a better light than in this film.
Blacks have been fooled into believing that this movie provides a little slice of vindication for slavery. The fact is that there was no Django. He is a fictional character that never existed. All that happened during slavery remains unchanged, as should the outrage over the institution itself.
Discussion about the top Black movies from 2012 being movies not made by Blacks. Meanwhile Spike Lee’s Red Hook Summer only grossed $300K. The movies that did well that were made by Blacks were full of foolishness.
We must stop letting other people tell our stories.
Related Articles:
Visit Podcast Website
RSS Podcast Feed
Subscribe
Share
Add to MyCast