History Headscratchers / DjangoUnchained

** Are we ''really'' questioning why the ex-slave who has met a grand total of two white people who have treated him with basic humanity while all the others have variously enslaved, degraded, abused, humiliated, neglected and / or attempted to castrate and/or kill and his loved ones might have a generally low opinion of white people? And why he might subsequently have few moral qualms with shooting the white people who have, in the events we see depicted, been largely responsible for (or at least passively complicit in) aforementioned enslavement, degradation, abuse, humiliation, neglect and / or attempts at castration or murder?

** 'Still crooked' is irrelevant. Schultz isn't on a morality crusade to bring evildoers to justice, he's hunting wanted criminals for money. Schultz knows the sheriff is a wanted man because a judge issued a bounty that said he was wanted. And while a bit of HollywoodLaw is involved, in those days any criminal that had a 'Wanted Dead or Alive' bounty on their heads had generally committed capital crimes, their guilt was beyond doubt, and they were almost certainly going to be hung if they happened to be brought in alive. The government didn't put a bounty on everybody that committed a crime, they were generally reserved for repeat and violent criminals that the normal Sheriff/Marshal simply couldn't deal with effectively. If the bounty was still valid (and it was), then the statute of limitations hadn't run out, and the crooked sheriff was going to hang if Schultz brought him back.

* Did anyone maybe get the feeling of a bit of racism in some of Django's actions? I mean, he kills Laura, who had basically done NOTHING to him, and oftentimes gunned down helpless opponents who were no threat to him(namely "Moonlight", one of Candie's thugs). Was that just a thing with the Spaghetti Westerns that this movie pays homage to or is it me?

*** It was clear at that point that emotion had purely overruled logic. You could see he was pissed that he'd just lost 12,000 bucks (she was worth 300, and if their diversion plan had worked then that's all Schultz would have paid). He was snapping at Lara for playing the music, and his mind kept flashing back to the dogs ripping D'Artagnan apart. He was already in a sorry state when Candie forced him to shake hands. At that point he just snapped. It was a "hot-blooded" murder, and he was willing to trade his life for it, so that's why he didn't bother fighting back.

*** Personally, while I dig Tarantino's explanation and it does make things more interesting (the ever-so cool Schultz was done in by his own hubris and by being a sore loser, Candie for all his evil was honorable enough- or at least apathetic enough- to be willing to make good on his business deal), my interpretation was that Schultz was a bit unhinged after the corruption and evil he witnessed at Candieland. Hence, the flashbacks he had of the slave being ripped apart by dogs. The revulsion at that atrocity and his own complicitness in it (interestingly, Django seems to have no guilt from it at all, so focused he was on saving his wife) caused Schultz to want to kill Candie regardless of the cost. Even when it would lead to the situation becoming even worse. It's Tarantino, after all- you can't have a happy ending without bloodstained pathos.

** The bounty said "dead or alive." Schultz doesn't care whether he felt guilty or not -- he's a bounty hunter, and there was a bounty on him.

*** This makes sense, since Candie's claim that the bill of sale wasn't legally binding unless there was a handshake is patently ridiculous. You could argue as much as you wanted in a court of law, but if the contract's properly signed and notarized(which it was), there's no way it's not legally binding unless one of the conditions of the contract was broken. Candie was also probably trying to take advantage of Schultz being a foreigner, counting on him not knowing the laws of the land. But since Schultz, as a bounty hunter, was an agent of the law, he would obviously be familiar with how contracts work under the United States system of law, so he obviously knew Candie was full of it.

** Absolutely. Django is a former slave. The only white people he probably came into contact with before the film were overseers and slavers. Schultz is almost definitely the first white guy that has ever treated him like a human being rather than a chattel. I'd be pretty prejudiced if that was the case

*** If that's the case, why didn't Django plug the Kitchen Slave lady(the one who was shown to be second to Stephen as far as house slaves went) and Candie's sex slave as well? As I pointed out before, Lara came off as rather detached from the overall brutality that her brother and Stephen were doing, and thus it just felt rather cruel that Django went and gunned her down for no real reason other than "she's the sister of Calvin."

*** This makes sense, since Candie's claim that the bill of sale wasn't legally binding unless there was a handshake is patently ridiculous. You could argue as much as you wanted in a court of law, but if the contract's properly signed and notarized(which it was), there's no way it's not legally binding unless one of the conditions of the contract was broken. Candie was also probably trying to take advantage of Schultz being a foreigner, counting on him not knowing the laws of the land. But since Schultz, as a bounty hunter, was an agent of the law, he would obviously be familiar with how contracts work under the United States system of law, so he obviously knew Candie was full of shit.

** Absolutely. Django is a former slave. The only white people he probably came into contact with before the film were overseers and slavers. Schultz is almost definitely the first white guy that has ever treated him like a human being rather than a chattel. I'd be pretty fucking prejudiced if that was the case

*** If that's the case, why didn't Django plug the Kitchen Slave lady(the one who was shown to be second to Stephen as far as house slaves went) and Candie's fuck-toy slave as well? As I pointed out before, Lara came off as rather detached from the overall brutality that her brother and Stephen were doing, and thus it just felt rather cruel that Django went and gunned her down for no real reason other than "she's the sister of Calvin."

*** It could be argued that Laura was, at least partly, responsible for Django and Shultz's plan falling apart. She commented on Hildy's attraction to Django ("Hildy seems to have big eyes for Django.") which drew Stephen's attention and led to Shultz getting killed. If Laura had have made that comment, it is entirely possible, maybe even likely, that Shultz, Django and Hildy could have ridden off without hassle or bloodshed.

*** What evidence do you have she detaches herself from the issues of slavery? That one line where she says she doesn't want to look at Hildy's wipped back? I'm sorry but that just tells me she's not a complete and utter sadist and is easily counteracted by the fact just scenes before hand she was gussying Hildy up to be raped by Dr. Schultz. We have no reason to believe that she isn't just as racist as everyone else who works at and runs Candieland or that she is ignorant of what Le-Quint Dickey is like.

** Are we ''really'' questioning why the ex-slave who has met a grand total of two white people who have treated him with basic humanity while all the others have variously enslaved, degraded, abused, humiliated, neglected and / or attempted to castrate and/or kill and his loved ones might have a generally low opinion of white people? And why he might subsequently have few moral qualms with shooting the white people who have, in the events we see depicted, been largely responsible for aforementioned enslavement, degradation, abuse, humiliation, neglect and / or attempts at castration or murder?

** Also, people... Rule Of Escapism. This isn't ''Film/12YearsASlave'' we're dealing with here, this is a wish-fulfilment fantasy operating on RuleOfCool. You're not supposed to be asking hard-hitting questions about the gritty realities of the difficulties of escaping white supremacist law-enforcement in the antebellum South, you're meant to cheer as an ex-slave literally blows up a slave plantation after killing all the bad guys in it, and if you do then frankly, in as much as you can watch a movie wrong you're watching this movie wrong. You might as well ask piercing questions about the geopolitical implications of Arnold Schwartenegger's rampage in ''Film/{{Commando}}''; fair enough if you want to, but you're missing the whole point if you do.

** Also, people... Rule Of Escapism. This isn't ''12 Years A Slave'' we're dealing with here, this is a wish-fulfilment fantasy operating on RuleOfCool. You're not supposed to be asking hard-hitting questions about the difficulties of escaping white supremacist law-enforcement in the antebellum South, you're meant to cheer as an ex-slave literally blows up a slave plantation after killing all the bad guys in it, and if you do then frankly, in as much as you can watch a movie wrong you're watching this movie wrong. You might as well ask piercing questions about the geopolitical implications of Arnold Schwartenegger's rampage in ''Film/{{Commando}}''; fair enough if you want to, but you're missing the whole point if you do.

* Candie land is at least half a days ride from town, is completely without leadership and probably very short on manpower when Django and Hildy leave it. I think it might take days before the authorities even know who they're looking for.

* How does Schultz know the sheriff is still crooked? People can feel guilty about their crimes and give up their evil ways. Why not take him in alive instead of gunning him down?

* How does Schultz know the sheriff is still crooked? People can feel guilty for their crimes and give up their evil ways. Why not take him in alive instead of immediately gunning him down?