Apparently QT misrepresented ‘Django’ as a film about slavery, when it actually is a spaghetti-western / blaxploitation film w ‘Ole Dixie-Land’ & Slavery as its back-drop.
He also apparently hyped Jamie Foxx as its star [for Black Audiences] when its the white German dude who: Frees Django & gives him license to kill ‘targeted’ white guys. It’s also the German Dude who confronts the main villain [DiCaprio's Candie], who enslaves & abuses ‘Django’s wife- which is why Django even goes to Candie-land; both intellectually & then ultimately exacts ‘justice’ on [takes out] Candie, while ‘Django’ just gets to knock off the 2nd Fiddle Uncle-Tom House-Negro! So then how is Jamie Foxx the real star QT???

But then there’s this from the ‘Daily Beast article ‘Django Selling slave Action Figures’ [@ http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/01/06/django-unchained-selling-slaves-as-action-figures.html ]
} The audacious release of the dolls could be perceived as adding insult to injury, especially considering Tarantino’s lack of regard for the legacy of Alex Haley’s epic 1977 mini-series Roots, which is American pop culture’s most prized depiction of slavery.
“When you look at Roots, nothing about it rings true in the storytelling, and none of the performances ring true for me either,” Tarantino told The Daily Beast’s Allison Samuels. “I didn’t see it when it first came on, but when I did I couldn’t get over how oversimplified they made everything about that time. It didn’t move me because it claimed to be something it wasn’t” [WHAT! This guy has got a Whole LOTTA of F-ING Nerve!].
Academy Award-winning actor Louis Gossett, Jr., who starred in Roots, dismissed Tarantino’s critique, he was just “stirring stuff up” and making a “mockery” out of racism.
Gossett revealed that after seeing ‘Django Unchained’ at a Malibu movie theater last weekend, he walked out within the first 20 minutes. “Django is a very small speck on the horizon to what we should be giving energy to,” Gossett said… {

I can name at-least 3 gut-wrenching scenes from ‘Roots’ off the top of my head, that I’m sure has more meaning RE Slavery & its devastation of African civilization / culture & the Black Family- than anything in QT’s ‘Django’. They are: 1} When the slavers caught Kunta Kinte & put those chains on him, -2} When that ‘n****r-Breaker’ whipped Kunta to make him stop saying Kunta & answer to Toby, & -3} When they sold Kizzy away from Kunta & Belle & ‘Ole Massa’ turned his back on Kunta as Kunta begged him not to send Kizzy away [& 'Massa's daughter 'conveniently' dissed Kizzy too].
The arrogance of this Guy! He Disses ‘Roots’ as NOT authentic while pimping ‘Django’ dolls- It’s enough to tell {San}Quentin to his FACE- N-i-GG-a PLEEZE!!!

PS: 2 Other gut-wrenching scenes RE the infamous middle-passage, were from ‘Amistad’ -1} When that dying slave-mother lifted her new-born baby up from that dark filthy ship’s-hold that she was chained to the bottom of, & -2} When they tied 20 weak / sickly slaves to that sack of stones & dumped them over-board- Like GARBAGE- While They Were Still ALIVE!
Those 5 scenes seemed ALL TOO REAL TO ME QT!

There were so many stereotypes in the movie from the Jezebel to the mammy too the mandingo…to the brute…to the Uncle Tom. It was just insulting on so many levels and again even with a movie that has slavery as the CENTER PIECE of the plot…we still learn little to nothing about slavery from a historical perspective. It amazes me how time and time again movies that are supposed to be about slavery…really aren’t.

1. Rape of enslaved Black women (nothing more than p**n and p***y parties if we go by Django). We don’t really get the emotional side of the rape that the women endured. We are only shown how angry it makes Django to see his wife abused because well..she’s his wife…we don’t really get the emotional side of what it would have been like for the women who were actually being abused.

I felt like women throughout the film overall were nothing more than mindless props…

2. It oversimplified slavery itself…they made it seem like it was just “that easy,” for an enslaved African-American to just kill all the white enslavers and get away from the plantation…it was just that simple and easy really?…

3. The “fancy girls,” or I guess they were supposed to be creole fancy girls because they were speaking French…they were props too. They made it seem as if every fancy girl was happy and content to be used as an object of s****l gratification for white men. It’s true that sometimes consensual relationship developed between fancy girls and the men they were involved with…but often times fancy girls were sold against their will into s****l slavery…particularly in the Delta region of the south and were abused sexually constantly…but Django just made it seem like they were living it up…dressed in nice clothes, drinking fine wine as if they weren’t SLAVES still…I didn’t get that.

4. The house slaves…the house slaves were portrayed as double agents or Uncle Toms all throughout the film and it’s true that there were some slaves who were traitors and who sided with the white slave owners (whether under duress or of their own free will) but this movie made it seem like most house slaves thought that they were better than the other slaves and sided with master and from what I’ve read that does NOT seem to be true. Often times house slaves would overhear when a sale was going to take place or would relay information they overheard from the slave master to the slaves in field or in the quarters so that they could alert their family and friends ahead of time what was to take place. Some house slaves outright rebelled against the slave owners. So I think it’s just divisive to portray Black people who were house slaves in such a perfidious and myopic manner.

5. Female slave hands are all ugly and ignorant…well at least that’s the impression that I got from Django when he said (in reference to his wife Broomhilda) “oh she ain’t no field hand…she pretty and she talk well…” So basically here we go again with the field vs. the house c**p…so now women who worked in the fields were ugly and ignorant…??? Really???…like there were no ugly house slaves?… what I took from Django’s reference to the beauty of Broomhilda and her status as a house slave was that the female house slaves were somehow better than the field workers…hmmmm…

6. Why was the KKK portrayed in this movie when it wasn’t founded until AFTER slavery in 1865?

7. Finally, someone please explain to me why in the h**l does the character Django have to “earn his freedom,” from the white bounty hunter who so gallantly rescues him from the horrors of slavery…only to make him a slave to himself? Well yes, Dr. Schultz promises Django freedom, but only after Django pulls a magical negro and helps the Doctor with his bounty hunting tasks…huh? Why should Django have to earn his freedom…IF Doctor was so against slavery, he should know that we’re all born free and entitled to freedom…

Final Thoughts:

I could go on…the whole movie was just a joke to me though…there were far too many laughs for a movie that is supposed to be portraying such a serious topic.

I would say don’t go into Django Unchained expecting any historical accuracy…there isn’t much and it would benefit everyone to read up on Slavery on their own because you won’t get much from the movie itself.

A Personal Note:

A few good things did come out of my watching this movie

1. I got to spend some time with my family

2. I was reminded of why it’s important to study African-American history on my own…so that I can challenge misrepresentations when they show up in films.

Nicole Galicia Django Unchained

3. I got to see beautiful, dark brown skinned Black women on film for once. The sad thing is it takes a movie about slavery to show dark-skinned Black women. As if the only time Black women can actually look Black is when we’re in a subordinate position to everyone else…but what can I say? The portrayal of Black women left much to be desired, but at least they actually were Black and beautiful looking…which is more than I can say for a lot of other movies. *cough cough, Red Tails*

Danièle Watts- Django Unchained

No the movie wasn’t horrible from an action standpoint…and like I said earlier it gives you that sugar rush that you may want…but does it really leave you feeling satisfied?..

Other Articles:

My Issue with Django Unchained

Tarantino’s Candy

Women in Lincoln and Django Unchained

OTHER POV:

Why I Liked Django Unchained
This entry was posted on December 29, 2012. 3 Comments
Christmas in the Big House, Christmas in the Quarters
Dec24

Have you ever wondered what it would have been like to be an African-American celebrating Christmas back in the 19th century…before the civil war? Today, many of us can enjoy gathering together with family, roasting turkey, opening gifts and above all we can enjoy the freedom to celebrate our holidays.

When I was 7 years old, my parents gave me the book Christmas in the Big House, Christmas in Quarters…for a Christmas present.

I’ve had the book for years, but I am just now reading it as an adult.

The book is written by Patricia McKissack and Frederick McKissack, with illustrations by John Thompson. It is a book about life in the antebellum south at Christmas time.

The story takes place in Virginia in 1859.

Here is what I learned.

In the Big House, Christmas was just a time for jubilation, in the slave quarters…Christmas was a rare time where Black people could eat a full meal and not feel the pains of hunger. It was also a time when African-Americans could possibly see family members who had been sold off to other plantations. Christmas was called “The Big Times,” by Black people in the quarters because it meant big things for both Blacks and Whites.

Preparing for Christmas:

Most of the preparation for Christmas was done by the Black slaves. They “white washed,” the whole house and cleaned everything and they prepared the food, over the watchful eye of the plantation mistress. One of the first tasks of the enslaved African-Americans on the plantation was to bring in the Christmas tree for the white women to decorate .

The Christmas tree originated in the Southern regions of the United States. German immigrants brought the tenenbaum to the South and it spread across the United States and then the world. Some families in the South viewed the German immigrants as being in the same category as the abolitionist of the North.

The Black women who worked in the house prepared much of the food that the white family and their extended family would eat.

One task that the white people had was to disseminate invitations by hand to other white families for the New Year’s Eve Ball. Another “Task,” that white men had was to write passes for slaves to visit family on Christmas Day.

What kinds of foods did the white family eat for Christmas Dinner?

Ham, steaks, roast turkey, dressing, gravy, vegetables, bread pudding fruit, desserts and coffee

What Kinds of Foods did Those in the slave Quarters eat for Christmas Dinner?

Roast chicken, squirrel, pickled pig feet, poke salad, collard greens, eggs, ham hocks, ash cakes, persimmon wine

While the white family got to eat good, hearty meals regularly, Christmas was the only time during the year that Black families who were enslaved really had a chance to eat a full meal and not feel hunger.

Although the white families generally received the “best cut,” of the meat and the Black families in the quarters got the leftovers, the Black mothers and women in the slave quarters were able to create gourmet meals from what little they had and sometimes the white families would come and visit the slave quarters and they would eat some of the Chitlins or ash cakes that the Black family prepared…in addition to eating their own meals.

According to McKissack , the purpose of these visits to the slave cabins on Christmas was to keep a “watchful eye,” on the Black people on the plantation. There was a lingering fear among the white people that the slaves would rebel like Nat Turner or like the Africans aboard the ship Creole.

What Kind of Gifts Did White People Get?

Most of the gifts were given to children, they would get things like white dolls, horns, wagons, blocks, Jacob’s Ladder, pocketknife and drums. Their stocking were filled with toys and candies.

What Kind of Gifts Did Enslaved Black People Get?

Fortunate Black families got to see their family members who were granted passes to come and visit family that was sold to other plantations. Some family members who weren’t granted passes to see their family on other plantation sent messages with other enslaved Blacks who were granted passes. Christmas was a time for messages to be relayed back and forth from plantation to plantation.

Those field hands got time in the quarters to relax for a change. The crops were planted and waiting to take root over the winter, so they got some time off.

Also because of the time off that Christmas gave to field hands, it wasn’t unusual for a wedding to occur over Christmas. The best dresses were dyed for the bride.

Unfortunately, the house servants had to keep working through Christmas most of the time.

The adults didn’t generally receive presents on Christmas, but children sometimes got handmade toys…like straw dolls, handmade whistles, a gee-haw stick, a hand made blanket.

Sometimes the white family gave presents to the Black family on plantation like a handkerchief, while the Black family had to reciprocate, usually by giving a handmade basket full of eggs or something of the like. If the Black family were invited into the house for Christmas…they were expected to show up, if they didn’t the slave master “kept mental note,” of who didn’t show up and sometimes that person would be penalized later.

People came from afar to visit the white families, sometimes they brought their slaves with them. One slave in the story came from New Orleans. Each region in the south had their own culture, so sometimes slaves from the deep south and upper south exchanged their regional cultures at Christmas time.

What Kinds of Things Did White Men Talk about at Christmas:

They talked about the fear of slave revolt, they talked about the possibility of secession from the North, they talked about how kind they were to their slaves at Christmas time and how “happy” their slaves were.

What Kind of Things Did Black People Talk about at Christmas:

They talked about the possibility emancipation, they talked about abolitionist, they talked about who was able to safely make it North to freedom. Christmas brought hope that soon the Black family would be celebrating Christmas, not as slaves, but as free people.

At The End of the Day:

Black Families sorrowfully say goodbye to the family members that they may not see again until the following Christmas, if at all…You never knew who would be sold when…

The White family retires to bed, feeling satisfied. The Black family goes to bed, dreaming of freedom and singing songs. The white family thinks that the songs the Black people sing are songs of jubilation, but they really are signals and messages used to communicate about the prospects of freedom.

After Christmas:

The field hands dispose of the Christmas tree and house is prepared for New Year’s Ball.

The White families go to a New Year’s Eve Ball.

The Black families enjoy the last days of “The Big Times,” before life goes back to normal.

After New Years:

After the holidays are over, the white folks read a list of all the Black people who would be sold off! Families are torn apart again, maybe only to be reunited at next Christmas…if the slave master permits it.

Shortly after “The Big Times,” are over…life goes back to normal for the slaves. They go back to scant meals, long work hours, not seeing their families that were sold afar…back to whippings and everything bad.

That was how things went for a while until slavery was legally removed.

Now, Today:

When I have the freedom to see my family whenever I want and eat full, hearty meals on a regular basis…I won’t take these things for granted because there was a time when I wouldn’t have been able to do that. It also makes me think of those who don’t have food and family available for Christmas.

I imagine that if I’m ever blessed to have my own children, I’ll gather them around and read this story to them too.
This entry was posted on December 24, 2012. 10 Comments
Discussion: Why Does Society Assign Value Based off of Racial s*x Ideals?
Dec23

What do these pictures make you think of? Do they make you feel like Black women are objectified? Do they make you feel sexier if you’re a Black woman?

When I am browsing around on the internet , I inevitably come across the polls, forums and discussions about “who is hot and who is not?” There are even certain websites that develop “hottest women,” by ethnicity lists, which is silly because we all know that beauty comes in all races…so why should these lists even matter?

When I can look at the lists or browse the various discussions on the internet that disregard Black women from the hot lists, I am left with mixed feelings. On the one hand, I feel that beauty is so subjective and diverse that these lists are just superficial and dumb…on the other hand, I know that we live in a sexist and superficial culture that assigns value to women based on their physical appearance and s*x appeal.

I know that depending on how “hot,” a woman is perceived to be, she’ll be given certain privileges over other women. In this society “hotness,” is correlated with race. There is a racial hierarchy that is set up to benefit certain groups above others. This is called erotic capital and I discussed this in another post about Siobhan Brooks.

When we have a hierarchy that awards erotic capital points to women who conform to a Eurocentric type of beauty, while disregarding Black women…how does that affect the perceived value of Black women?

Do these images even matter? What can we do to change the way society values women?

This entry was posted on December 23, 2012 and tagged beyonce, black women, hot, sexy. 8 Comments
Obama Needs to Cry for ALL The Children Around the World: Response to Abagond
Dec18

children are children wherever you go

This a short response to Abagond’s post Obama Cries for White Children . His post is in reference to the tragic Connecticut Newtown Elementary School shooting.

Abagond writes,

“President Obama appeared on television and gave a brief statement. For the first time since his grandmother died four years ago, he teared up in public…Yet he has not publicly teared up over the 97 (or more) children he has killed with his drones and cruise missiles – equal to almost five Newtowns. Killings which the United Nations calls “indiscriminate” and which his own computers call“bug splat”…He uses drones to send Hellfire missiles at houses, schools, restaurants and bakeries. He sends them when you are with your grandmother. He sends them during Ramadan. He sends them during funerals…Obama does not even publicly name the children he has killed. Apparently because their lives do not matter to him. Apparently because they are not beautiful…Apparently because they are not well-to-do White Americans.”

My first reaction to Abagond’s post was not shock or anger because I can understand where he is coming from. My heart was and still is broken for the children who were killed on Friday at the Newtown Elementary school. Those children were beautiful, they were unique, defenseless, tiny, little humans who have left this world too soon. It hurts my heart and I mourn for them, their families and loved ones….

With that being said,

My initial reaction to this particular tragedy was sadness confounded by anger. I am angry because this country has a problem with gun control and some people are so stuck on their “right to bear arms,” that they don’t value the right to life. I FEEL that the government teaches us that it’s okay to use weapons to harm those whom we don’t value…it teaches us that it’s okay to be violent to those who are vulnerable and can’t defend themselves. I was angry that Obama didn’t touch on this issue in his address to the country and I was angry that politicians danced around these questions when asked by reporters what role gun control and violence played in this incident and countless other incidents.

I’m not saying no guns should be allowed at all, but do we really need for AK47′s and assault rifles to be made available to the masses… and would it hurt to have stricter screening process to obtain a firearm? No, it wouldn’t…but this is not the main point of my post…gun control is just a side note.

In his post Abagond made reference to the fact that children who are murdered everyday around the world in other countries…do not get Obama’s tears. In fact they don’t even get names, they don’t get acknowledged and going by the media…they don’t even exist because we never hear about them….are the lives of the countless children who are killed not only in other countries (by OUR government’s missiles mind you) but the ones who are killed in everyday America less valuable than the lives of the children who were killed in the Newtown tragedy…??

In the midst of the all the media coverage of the tragedy in Newtown, one comment stood out to me. It was a comment made by a middle-aged gentlemen and he said that “things like this don’t happen here.”

When I heard that comment, I was left thinking to myself…so if this happened somewhere else…like say in the US ghetto or in the Middle East somewhere…would it be less tragic…would it matter less?.. Should it matter less?

Of course the answer is no, it wouldn’t be less tragic and no it would not matter less…well that is what the answer should be anyway.

No child’s life is less valuable than another. The little girl that was gunned down in the street of Chicago is no less valuable than the little children that are killed by American missiles in the Middle East and their lives are not less valuable than the children who were killed in Newtown. All of these killings are senseless. All of these children were unique, precious, beautiful, little humans. They had things that they loved to do, they meant something to someone and it’s a precious, unique life that has left this world too soon.

It hurts my heart to see people look at the tragedy of Newtown and not connect that tragedy to the bigger picture. Why can’t we open our eyes and see things not as separate groups, but as people for once…I don’t want people to say “this kind of thing doesn’t happen here,” I want people to say “this shouldn’t happen anywhere.” People do not understand that when you don’t value the lives of the children of any one group, you don’t value the lives of children everywhere. All of the pain and suffering that the parents and families are going through now is the same pain and sorrow that the parents around the world feel when their children are killed by senseless violence. That’s the same sorrow that the mother whose child dies at the hand of gang violence in the inner city feels. If you look into each other and connect as people, there’s something very overwhelming about the connection that sorrow has to our humanity.

Sorrow is cross cultural and universal…it’s a testament to our needs as human beings. We all want a safe world for our children to grow up in, we all want to preserve our children and their innocence because it’s a reminder of the innocence that should be humanity. When we birth children and bring them into the world, we relish their innocence because we crave the simplicity…we crave the blissful ignorance. It’s just so astounding to me that when a child is born, the baby doesn’t know of all the evils of the world, they don’t come out hating people or wanting to kill people…they come out with a fresh, clean and new spirit…which is something that people yearn for as we get older. Something that maybe we’re continuously searching for….

Children everywhere are so valuable.

So, it pains my heart to see children ANYWHERE in the world being cast aside, murdered and made into nameless targets on someone’s radar…when we kill that innocence, we kill ourselves off. There is no color line, there is no political line to be drawn when it comes to valuing a child’s life…and that is why it hurts me…and that is why we need to weep for all the children.

Maybe if we weep together enough, we’ll learn to comfort each other and if we can comfort each other, we’ll understand the sorrow that we share and if we understand the sorrow, we’ll see each other’s humanity…we’ll see ourselves in each other and if we can see ourselves in each other, then maybe we’ll stop the senseless violence…and we’ll stop allowing children everywhere to be victims of people who don’t value their humanity…which is the same as not valuing all of humanity. No more US missiles striking cities and towns and killing children, no more Newtowns, no more gang shootings that destroy children in their midst…none of that.

Those are my thoughts…I wish things were different.
This entry was posted on December 18, 2012. 20 Comments
“The War On Drugs Is Genocide.”
Dec12

Black people were brought to this country for labor. The history of slavery is no secret, but after slavery, what happened? Reconstruction, the Black Nadir, Jim Crow and post-civil rights movement. All throughout these eras there have been ways that African-Americans have been denied their rights. In slavery, we were denied our right to freedom, in the Reconstruction and Black Nadir we were forced into a system of peonage, which was virtually slavery only modified, in Jim Crow we were denied our civil rights…today mass incarceration of African-Americans and other people of color is the new injustice. Blacks disproportionately make up the prison population.

Why? After the civil rights movement when housing discrimination became imminent, Black neighborhoods were red-lined and denied the right to mortgage and property value declined. When jobs were removed from these areas, the poverty created a culture of desperation. When the CIA introduced drugs into the Black community, a downward spiral occurred. That is when the war on drugs started and that is where things are today.

The war on drugs was said to have began in the Nixon administration, it was meant to put an end to the “culture of drugs,” that was destroying America, but instead it further disenfranchised millions of Black Americans, Brown Americans and poor whites, but disproportionately affected Black Americans. The systematic denial of jobs, proper housing and adequate schools coupled with the “sudden appearance,” of drugs in the Black community created a vulnerable environment into which some young Black Americans were sucked in.

However,

Notes:

- Government denies rights of Blacks in slavery, black nadir, Jim Crow, the present

- throughout 19th century, opium, cocaine, marijuana and other drugs were readily available to high class whites. They were used in medicine and common household products, if a person became addicted they weren’t treated as criminal, but seen as victims of a health-related issue.

- An influx of immigrants from China and Central/South American as well as an influx of Blacks moving North during the great migration prompted officials to create drug laws that penalized drug users as criminals, instead of victims of health-related issues. These laws were designed to keep POC out of factory and other blue collar jobs.

- poverty created when black neighborhoods red-lined after the great migration, jobs removed from black areas

- drugs introduced into the black community, only source of income, many succumb to temptation

- even though blacks only make up small portion of drug users in US, they are arrested at the highest rates and incarcerated for drugs

- drugs laws like crack vs. cocaine disparity, minimum sentencing unfairly target Blacks, especially poor Blacks, while they excuse wealthy whites by cutting them slack

- police are just pawns in the system, they earn money off of arrests they make so they can feed their families. This fuels distrust and disdain for police within black community

- companies and corporations have a vested interest in maintaining the prison industrial complex and keeping blacks, POC and poor whites in prison so they can get their products made for free

- those incarcerated lose their rights, including right to vote, right to live in certain neighborhoods, increasingly difficult to become employed after being incarcerated.

- When these people unable to find jobs, homes or vote, they succumb to a life of crime, end up back in prison and the cycle begins again

- Jobs being sent overseas causes poor whites to lose Blue collar jobs, they become new target of war on drugs

- the increase in incarceration creates culture of violence, spreads diseases, breaks up families, creates cycle of poverty and ultimately culture of violence leads to death of young Black males…

Does this seem like genocide to you?
This entry was posted on December 12, 2012. 5 Comments
Another Promising Young Black Man Gunned Down in Florida
Dec7

Trayvon Martin has taught the world nothing.

Jordan Davis, a 17 year old Black male and some of his friends (also Black males) were sitting in his car playing “loud music,” when Michael Dunn, a 45 year old white male pulled up beside him. Dunn asked the young men to turn down the music, an altercation ensued and Dunn ended up shooting Davis multiple times.

Dunn claimed that Davis had a shotgun aimed at him and he only shot in self defense. However, police have yet to locate the shotgun that was allegedly pointed at Dunn by Davis. Davis later died on his way to the hospital.

The media has already looked into Jordan Davis’ background and determined that “he wasn’t part of a gang,” and had “A good upbringing…” because you know if he’s Black…he must have been up to no good with is gang of homies and therefore deserved being shot 8 times…right…*Sarcasm*

Apparently Trayvon Martin has taught Florida nothing.

Florida with it’s STAND YOUR GROUND law is quickly becoming the new Mississippi.

There was no hoodie involved in this incident, so that can’t be what’s to blame this time…so what next?

Michael Dunn has been arrested, so that’s a step in the right direction…but honestly Florida…COME ONE now!

My heart goes out to his family and loved ones, to lose a child right around the Holidays…that’s truly sad.

source
This entry was posted on December 7, 2012. Leave a comment
Recent Comments
darth71 on Applause for Django Unchained:…
THE ALCHEMIST on Applause for Django Unchained:…
Peanut on Fear of Black p***y
Hayden Lesley on Fear of Black p***y
Hayden Lesley on Fear of Black p***y
Hayden Lesley on Fear of Black p***y
Hayden Lesley on Fear of Black p***y
goldenhoney on What Do Black Men Think of Bla…
Henry on Fear of Black p***y
Ahmet Turgut on Fear of Black p***y
Archives
Blogroll

Abagond
Black and Missing
Lovinmysistas

Resources and Information

Resources
More Information

Black! Not White Dipped in Chocolate is licensed under creative commons, for more information please visit the more information page.
Creative Commons License
The Beautiful Black Doll on the Shelf by Black! Not White Dipped in Chocolate is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://blacknotwhitedippedinchocolate.wordpress.com/more-information/.
Black! Not White Dipped in Chocolate

But whether or not you agree w Donnelly’s rave ‘Django’ review- he made this curious accusation RE Spike Lee’s declaration that he refuses to see it because Spike feels it shows disrespect to his / our ancestors: }’I can only conclude that Spike is either a woeful, jealous film critic or a RACIST. The only “disrespect” here is Lee attacking another Director’s work without even seeing it.’{
That Donnelly feels he can so loosely label Spike a RACIST RE QT’s film sorta p*ssed me off! ‘Django’ is {San}Quenton’s 3rd [that I can recall] film featuring a largely/mainly Black cast, the other 2 were ‘Pulp Fiction’ & ‘Jackie Brown’ [Samuel Jackson's featured prominently in all 3]. In all 3 films QT has ‘liberally’ used N-i-GG-e-R in their dialogues -AND- He Himself Literally used it in a cameo in ‘Pulp Fiction’ w that infamously ‘funny’ ‘Dead N-i-GG-e-R Storage’ scene. Yet Donnelly excuses QT’s ‘liberal’ use of the N-word in ‘Django’ while labeling Spike a RACIST for refusing to see it- HUMM…
So Mr Donnelly how many Spike Lee movies has he repeatedly & incessantly referred to white people as honky, red-neck, cracker, etc??? If QT did 3 prominent movies where the dialogue incessantly referred to LGBT folks as F*ggots or even Homos -or- constantly referred to Jews by some derogatory name(s), I seriously doubt that Donnelly would be so apt to make excuses for QT while calling a prominent Jewish &/or LGBT critic a hater for calling him out on it!!!
Heck Mel Gibson caught flack from LGBT critics for his classic epic ‘Brave-Heart’ when he didn’t even use the word ‘f-A-g’ or h**o at-all in his movie! And those LGBT critics did NOT get called ‘haters’ – It Was Gibson who got labeled ‘h**o-Phobic’ & later even ‘Anti-Semitic’- for his ‘Passion of the Christ’!
MY Point- Beware of whites who so loosely play the ‘Racist-Card’ in reference to Blacks- no matter if they call themselves conservatives or so-called ‘Liberals’!

Bigelow sold her movie, which hypes ‘extreme interrogation techniques [=TORTURE] as essential for hunting down the ‘Phantom Menace’ Bin Laden ‘Legend’, as based on real factual events. But when she was called to task for the hype that torture was/is a reliable way to ‘extract’ sound intel has been TOTALLY Debunked & is Completely FALSE- She then used the ‘artistic license’ excuse. Hey Ms Bigelow You can NOT have it both ways, either your movie is a realistic portrayal of true events- OR IT AIN’T- PERIOD.

When Spielberg was called to task RE his ‘epic’ movie’s, “Lincoln”, failure to portray NOT EVEN ONE Significant Black Abolitionist / Freedom-Fighter / Union Soldier of the Civil War era’s fight to end slavery, He said that his movie focused on the political Maneuvering RE that issue- As if the Civil War & Abolitionist movement were NOT part of that political equation.

So now QT comes w ‘Django’ On one hand he hypes it as a statement about the brutality of slavery which has been largely forgotten in so-called ‘post-racial’ USA. -BUT- Then when called to task about how his film seems to turn much of slavery’s brutality into some kind of JOKE, He then says his movie is really just a spaghetti-western / black-xplotation film w slavery as its back drop- NOT a serious statement RE slavery. SO which is it QT? An important statement RE slavery’s brutality or just a spaghetti-western / black-xplotation film???

If Dr. Jones wants a movie about solely about slavery then I would suggest she makes one to her liking. Depending on Hollywood to do it for us and criticize it is silly. Django was not about slavery but a man that wanted to find his wife.