Original Django was White - Django Unchained (2012) Discussion

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 3 years ago

Jamie Foxx didn’t steal anything. Quentin Tarantino wrote the character to be black. I’m just gonna assume you’re a troll or mentally retarded. Probably both.

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

The people who decided to make him Black stole the role. Original Django was White. It's not different than making Shaft or Wesley Snipe's Blade White. The only one who's retarded is you.

reply

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 3 years ago

The person, not people, who decided that was Tarantino. He “borrows” from other films. It’s his thing to pay homage to other films he likes. The story’s are completely different and have no relation other than the Western genre and the name of the lead character. Having a white Django in the context of this film would make absolutely no sense.

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Or he could have written a different story and made a Django White like he was originally. But he chose a Black guy in order to virtue signal about racism. Jamie Fox even bragged about how fun it is to kill White people throughout this movie and it caused no controversy.

By your logic, it would be totally acceptable to make a new Shaft movie, rewrite the story in order to fit a White guy and cast Tom Cruise.

reply

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 3 years ago

Yes, that would be fine as long as the white Shaft character is logically consistent with the story. I’m sure it’d piss some people off, my criticism would probably be that Cruise might not be right white actor for a smooth, street wise private detective. If there’s a white Shaft, infiltrating the black mafia and black nationalist groups by pretending to be a member, that wouldn’t be logically consistent. That I would have an issue with. It’d be unrealistic like the little rascals fooling adults by putting two children standing on top of each other in a trench coat. Having a white Django as a former slave turned bounty Hunter rescuing his slave wife who was sold off makes no sense to the story

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

How about changing Shaft into a White guy because of a right wing ideology that would become dominant in Hollywood?

reply

[–] Karl Aksel (1496) 3 years ago

Seven Samurai was remade into a Western with a white cast. It worked fine because Magnificent Seven was set in 19th century America, not in 16th century Japan.

reply

[–] Galilguy (2525) 3 years ago

Blade will always be the most badass imo

reply

[–] bobbydallas (8671) 3 years ago

Blade is epic af

reply

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 3 years ago

But Shaft is a bad motherfu—
Shut yo mouth!

reply

[–] Sparky (2712) 2 years ago

The reason Shaft was not as successful is because no one understands him but his woman.

reply

[–] Mrmojo4700 (21695) 3 years ago

The original Django, Franco Nero, gave his 100% blessing to QT’s film and even plays a part in it. If the real Django doesn’t have a problem with QT’s take on the character why should you?

Either way none of the over thirty unofficial Django sequels, including Tarantino’s, will ever be as great as the original.

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Nero's opinion is irrelevant. He's just a typical left wing actor. Or he could be just glad for the cameo and publicity. Every White person should be against Blackwashing of White characters just like every Black person is against Whitewashing.

reply

[–] Mrmojo4700 (21695) 3 years ago

I would also hope you consider that Tarantino is a massive fan of both the original Django (1966) and Franco Nero.

reply

[–] cyguration (3951) 3 years ago

The original is a much better film, and it would have made more sense if the hero was white (like in the original) and he freed a slave who became his sidekick, and they ended up rescuing the slave's wife.

Not much really needed to change to maintain some kind of congruence with the original, rather than blackwashing it for the sake of being politically correct.

reply

[–] HarryShoulder (279) 3 years ago

How would it make more sense if the hero was white? Are black people not capable of being heroes? Bounty hunters?

reply

[–] Kowalski (78704) 3 years ago

HIS "POINT" MAKES NO SENSE.🤔

reply

[–] Druff (1841) 2 years ago

>Nero's opinion is irrelevant. He's just a typical left wing actor.

And you're just a typical butt hurt alt right incel snowflake, so your opinion is at least twice as irrelevant.

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 2 years ago

Eat shit.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 2 years ago

how is this clown Neo nazi still heres

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 2 years ago

Eat shit

reply

[–] Druff (1841) 2 years ago

Sorry for hitting a nerve.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 2 years ago

even Tarantino himself said it was an homage. Overton likes coming on here and getting owned. hes into embarrassment kinks I think

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 2 years ago

Wrong I totally owned that guy. If an homage was made to a Shaft movie like that with a White guy playing him there would be an enormous controversy. I have a point.

reply

[–] NotoriousRio (12927) 3 years ago

The original Django film is better than this, but using the name Django is just Tarantino paying homage, Foxx is not supposed to be Franco Nero's Django.

After the success of Django (1966), many westerns were made with Django in the title, all totally unrelated to Franco Nero's Django (not counting his sequels!), film-makers did this to sell tickets.

reply

[–] Mrmojo4700 (21695) 3 years ago

Check out this link. I hope this one happens.

https://ph.news.yahoo.com/franco-nero-recon-cuba-project-131652827.html

reply

[–] NotoriousRio (12927) 3 years ago

A Tarantino cameo! I hope Django shoots him! 😂

reply

[–] Mrmojo4700 (21695) 2 years ago

I wish this film would be made.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

it was a totally different character, story, timeframe, place where it happened. its similar to getting mad that a black characters name is max because you saw a film with a white character named max in another film.

from your other posts I could believe you are this dim witted

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Nope, it's not totally a different movie with the same name. It's a remake of the original. It even features Franco Nero as a cameo.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

yes tarintio pays homage. he ws a big fan and is known for cameos! and?

please list all the similarities and why its a similar film! besides both are westerns. if a black character was called max it would trigger you that its a remake of mad max

a remake is "A remake tells the same story as the original but uses a different cast, and may alter the theme or change the story's setting"

which it isnt. nothing is the same

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

A remake does not need to have the same story. The sequel does not need to have the same story, but it still comes from the same franchise. This may not be a remake in a exact definition, but it's from the same franchise. Django is not a popular name like Max. It's another Django film like the Westerns in the 70s, but this time they changed the main character to be Black so that the movie is PC and "inclusive".

It even uses the same theme:

Django Unchained music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAooXLAPoBQ

Original Django music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_OiUURbYlQ

The music is EXACTLY the same. So much for your nonsense argument that it's a totally different movie with just the same name.

if a black character was called max it would trigger you that its a remake of mad max

No, it wouldn't. That wouldn't bother anyone.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

yes it has the same name and Tarantino used the intro theme music, as a homage.

"A remake does not need to have the same story. The sequel does not need to have the same story, but it still comes from the same franchise."

again wtf are you talking about? now you are talking about sequels, which are different then remakes!

you are now reaching because you know you have nothing.

"It's another Django film like the Westerns in the 70s, but this time they changed the main character to be Black so that the movie is PC and "inclusive". "

QT is inclusive and woke? you are so stupid

its not a remake, a reimagining or a sequel. nothing is similar except the name. he used the music for the intro and then, look at that! it never uses music from the original again! or borrows its theme or score again!

its from a director who loves to homage and did so. you lost you pathetic triggered conservative

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

What? Do you STILL CLAIM THIS MOVIE IS NOT FROM THE DJANGO FRANCHSIE after I've clearly proven it is????? You've said the only thing similar is the name. No, it's not. It's a DJANGO FRANCHISE movie. It uses a different story and they made Django Black, but the movie is obviously from the DJANGO FRANCHISE. You are so retarded it's unbelievable.

reply

[–] SamNoyoun (6008) 3 years ago

"the DJANGO FRANCHISE"

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

https://c.tenor.com/Eu6wtpHo-GkAAAAM/glee-quinn-fabray.gif

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Who the fuck are you? Yes, Django is a franchise. There were many Django films and all of them had a White character in the lead. GTFO moron.

reply

[–] Mrmojo4700 (21695) 3 years ago

Almost all of the 30 something films that came after Django (1966) only used the name and character similarities. The only official sequel is Django Strikes Again (1987) and stars Franco Nero as an older Django. There is also talk of Nero in a 3rd Django film but the project was stalled by covid.

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Yes and all of the Django's were White. This time they changed him into Black. My OP "Original Django was White" is true.

reply

[–] Mrmojo4700 (21695) 3 years ago

That’s correct. The only true Django is Franco Nero who has appeared in 2 films as that character. All others are unofficial.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

amazing how you keep moving the goalposts. flailing even more desperately. first it was a remake of the film. then you started talking about sequels (moving further away), then you say its in the franchise (which is not a remake)

sir you have no argument.

Tarantino borrowed the name as a homage and that is it.

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

You keep avoiding the main issue. My main point was that they changed a White character (original django) into a Black one to which you replied wasn't true because the movie has nothing to do with original Django besides the name. If this movie is connected to the original Django movie from 1966 then they DID change the character and my original post has a point and you DON'T.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

its not the same character. nor the same backstory, nor arc, nor origin. nor story, nor time period, nor events, nor costume

triggered conservative is triggered black person is called Django

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Costume and story can be totally different, but still be part of the same franchise. It's the same franchise. They changed Django from White to Black. My OP has a point.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

ill repost it again. since you cannot read apparently!

aww dumb overtonpendulum struggles with written words.

"its not the same character. nor the same backstory, nor arc, nor origin. nor story, nor time period, nor events, nor costume
"

I didnt just say costume. NOTHING is similar. your OP has no point. There is no similarities between the two characters, or the events of the film.

get triggered snowflake conservative

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

NOTHING is similar.

Hahahaha. Omg this is pure gold.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

wait it was a remake before.

you admitted it was a tribute, not remake or in the franchise. you proved my point. thank you

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

So now you're backing up from your idiotic sentence "nothing is similar"? Hahahah

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

"No it's not. The first paragraph of the movie's Wikipedia page clearly says that the movie is a tribute to the original Django from 1966:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Django_Unchained";;

you already conceded dull wit

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

It's strongly connected with the original. It's part of the same franchise. They changed the race of the main character called "Django" from White to Black. I have a point.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

"No it's not. The first paragraph of the movie's Wikipedia page clearly says that the movie is a tribute to the original Django from 1966:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Django_Unchained";;

you already conceded dull wit

not a remake or in the franchise. you admitted it!

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Do you even know what a Franchise is you moron???

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

ohh so now its part of the franchise! first it was a remake, then you started talking about sequels. now you say franchise.

you hav Eno argument thats why you are jumping all over

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Yes it is a franchise. There are many Django movies and at least two that are OFFICIALLY a franchise since they feature the same actor (Franco Nero) and story. Franchise or a remake doesn't make a difference, my point was they changed Django's race.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

you said it was a remake. you are all over the place. you dont care about facts, you want to be offended and triggered no matter what.

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

You said this movie is connected to the original just by the name and that changing Django from White to Black is the equivalent of having a Black character by the same name in a totally different movie. This is totally false.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

im responding to your nonsense. which has moved goalposts three times now.

first

-"It's a remake of the original."
-"The sequel does not need to have the same story, but it still comes from the same franchise."
-then you just say oh well its in the franchise.

yes it is equivalent, as this shares pretty much nothing with the original Django and its character other than the name.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

im going to write a sci fi movie script.the main character will be called Picard, but it will have nothing to do with star fleet, any of its history, the main character will be nothing like Picard, it will have virtually no similarities.

but its "in the same franchise"

right you dull wit?

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

False analogy since both Django movies are Westerns. If you used the same name of a movie, the same cover fonts, and the same theme ... etc you would be sued by copyright infringement.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

yes Tarantino does genre films. he made a western. doesnt mean its the same character.

you are truly a dull-wited simpleton

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

It's the same franchise. I'm 100% certain that when this movie was made, they made some kind of deal with the studio which held the rights to the original, otherwise Tarantino would have been sued.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

wait it was a remake before.

you admitted it was a tribute, not remake or in the franchise. you proved my point. thank you

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

So you don't deny the movie is MUCH MORE CONNECTED to the original Django than just the name? The movie has the same title. They changed the race of the main character from White to Black and they did it for political reasons.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

"No it's not. The first paragraph of the movie's Wikipedia page clearly says that the movie is a tribute to the original Django from 1966:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Django_Unchained";;

you already conceded dull wit

not a remake or in the franchise. you admitted it!

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6342) 3 years ago

The majority of people consider this one better than the original. Majority rules buddy boy.

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

It may have been a good movie, but they changed the race of the character, so I have a point.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6342) 3 years ago

Nope you don't. Majority rules. It's a better film than the original.

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

How do I not have a point? They race swapped the character Django. If someone did that to the Shaft movie, weather a remake or just a tribute , it would have been a hellstorm.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6342) 3 years ago

Me 14 you 0.

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

A player cannot be the referee at the same time.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6342) 3 years ago

Me 14 you 0.

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

You didn't even present a single argument.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6342) 3 years ago

Just for being a jerk we are adding another point. Me 15 you 0.

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Ok buddy, keep living in your delusion

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

they didnt change any characters race. because it wasnt the same character! a character will have certain similar traits, features, back story, origin, arch, setting it takes place ect.

This had none of that! it was simply Tarantino being Tarantino. picking a unique, albeit more obscure name that would be less recognizable, to pay homage to a classic film he liked, and making his own genre film. with new and unique characters.

its akin to getting mad at the Max Payne films for stealing the character of mad max.

or if in 50 years a director makes a totally unique sci fi film and names his character Picard, and you yell that its a remake of Star Trek and in the franchise!!

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Then why did he name him DJANGO??? Why not simply make a totally unrelated movie with a different title? If the movie's name wasn't DJango nobody would be complaining about the race swap.

its akin to getting mad at the Max Payne films for stealing the character of mad max.

No it's not. The first paragraph of the movie's Wikipedia page clearly says that the movie is a tribute to the original Django from 1966:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Django_Unchained

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

BECAUSE Tarantino likes homaging his favourite films. you just fucking learning this? you are the epitome of stupidy.

no one is complaining about race swapping, except a handful of pathetic losers like you. a weak, dumb snowflake conservative who comes to whine on the internet.

yes a tribute! not part of the franchise, not a sequel, not a remake. you dumb fuck.

you do know tribute means a different thing than remake? or they would have used to word remake. thank you for proving I was right!

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

The only one who is dumb is you. It's clearly part of the same franchise. The race was swapped for political reasons. If Whites weren't so brainwashed to hate themselves and fear of being called racist much more of them would complain about the PATTERN of replacing Whites with Blacks for nothing more than political reasons. My OP has a point. They are doing this all over the place. Djano is not the only movie they changed the race.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

"No it's not. The first paragraph of the movie's Wikipedia page clearly says that the movie is a tribute to the original Django from 1966:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Django_Unchained";

you already conceded dull wit

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Homaging? If it was just homaging it wouldn't have THE SAME FREAKIN TITLE. If it has the same title, the same fonts and the same theme it's part of the same franchise.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

"No it's not. The first paragraph of the movie's Wikipedia page clearly says that the movie is a tribute to the original Django from 1966:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Django_Unchained";;

you already conceded dull wit

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

You said the movie isn't connected to the original by nothing more than the name. If it's more connected, then I have a point that they changed the race. Orignal Django was played by Franco Nero and he was White.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

"No it's not. The first paragraph of the movie's Wikipedia page clearly says that the movie is a tribute to the original Django from 1966:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Django_Unchained";;

you already conceded dull wit

not a remake or in the franchise. you admitted it!

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

I have not. It's the same franchise. The producers had to make a deal with the studio of the original otherwise they would have been sued.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

in your own words!

"No it's not. The first paragraph of the movie's Wikipedia page CLEARLY SAYS that the movie is a TRIBUTE to the original Django from 1966:"

they didn't say it's clearly a remake, or clearly part of the franchise. it's a TRIBUTE.

amazing you are so dumb you admitted you were wrong!

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

A tribute doesn't mean it's not part of the Django franchise. You said the only connection to the original is the name and that complaining about the race swap is equivalent to complaining about a Black character also named Max. This is a totally false analogy. They changed the character Django's race for this movie.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

Yes you do not make a tribute to a film in its own franchise you dumb fuck

in your own words!

"No it's not. The first paragraph of the movie's Wikipedia page CLEARLY SAYS that the movie is a TRIBUTE to the original Django from 1966:"

they didn't say it's clearly a remake, or clearly part of the franchise. it's a TRIBUTE.

amazing you are so dumb you admitted you were wrong!

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

If it's not the same Django brand or franchise, then why does it have the same name, the same Character's name, the same poster fonts and the same theme song?? Django is a brand and this movie is a movie of this brand. If they changed the race from Black to White, it would have been a hellstorm of controversy.

Let's say I make a movie named "Shaft" that is a tribute to the ordinal Shaft movie, it's still a crime movie, but I change the race from Black to White. Would that be race swapping? Would there be a controversy??? Do you really think there would have been no controversy?

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

BHAHAHAHA now hes saying "brand"

so we've moves from remake, to sequel, to franchise, to tribute, to brand.

4 goal post movings by the dull wit Overton.

another reminder you dummy! of your own words!

"No it's not. The first paragraph of the movie's Wikipedia page CLEARLY SAYS that the movie is a TRIBUTE to the original Django from 1966:"

they didn't say it's clearly a remake, or clearly part of the franchise. it's a TRIBUTE.

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Weather it's officially a franchise or just a brand is just semantics. The point stands. They changed the race of the character Django.

Let's say I make a movie named "Shaft" that is a tribute to the ordinal Shaft movie, it's still a crime movie, and it has the same theme song and the same cover fonts, but I change the race from Black to White. Would that be race swapping? Would there be a controversy??? Do you really think there would have been no controversy?

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

"No it's not. The first paragraph of the movie's Wikipedia page CLEARLY SAYS that the movie is a TRIBUTE to the original Django from 1966:"

they didn't say it's clearly a remake, or clearly part of the franchise. it's a TRIBUTE.

your own words dull wit. destroying you is too simple :)

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

"semantics".

lol

remake, sequel, franchise, tribute, brand!

"I just use words I dont understand! and if you call me out its "semantics"

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Yep, just semantics, because the original point stands. They swapped the race of Django.

Let's say I make a movie named "Shaft" that is a tribute to the ordinal Shaft movie, it's still a crime movie, and it has the same theme song and the same cover fonts, but I change the race from Black to White. Would that be race swapping? Would there be a controversy??? Do you really think there would have been no controversy?

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

imdb FAQ

Is this a remake/sequel of the film 'Django'?

No. The script is an original story written by Quentin Tarantino. However, Tarantino does seem to have been somewhat influenced by Django (1966) (1966), as he pays homage to it in several respects, such as featuring Franco Nero, star of the original movie, in a cameo as "Bar Patron"

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Doens't matter if it's an official remake or not, they swapped the race of the Django character in the Django brand.

Let's say I make a movie named "Shaft" that is a tribute to the ordinal Shaft movie, it's still a crime movie, and it has the same theme song and the same cover fonts, but I change the race from Black to White. Would that be race swapping? Would there be a controversy??? Do you really think there would have been no controversy?

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

the conservative record is broken. he needs to be the victim nd place the race card.

dont worry, you can stop being triggered! you admitted it wasnt connected! its a tribute!

"No it's not. The first paragraph of the movie's Wikipedia page CLEARLY SAYS that the movie is a TRIBUTE to the original Django from 1966:"

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Why are you avoiding the point I keep bringing up? If someone did that to the Shaft movie, it would have been a hellstorm. Because you have no counter arguments.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

no one of any note anywhere including tarintio is saying its a sequel or part of the franchise>

get triggered! by your own quote none the less

"No it's not. The first paragraph of the movie's Wikipedia page CLEARLY SAYS that the movie is a TRIBUTE to the original Django from 1966:"

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

If someone did that to the Shaft movie, weather a remake or just a tribute , it would have been a hellstorm. My OP stands. Original Django was White.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

the little victim. is wrong

"No it's not. The first paragraph of the movie's Wikipedia page CLEARLY SAYS that the movie is a TRIBUTE to the original Django from 1966:"

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Why are you repeating yourself like a parrot? Why don't you address my main point? If someone did that to the Shaft movie, weather a remake or just a tribute , it would have been a hellstorm.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

aww the triggered conservative is stuck like a. broken record. he needs to be the whiny triggered victim today and this is his topic

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Go fuck yourself leftist fa***t.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

triggered is confirmed.

if you could stop trying to make everything about your own personal victimization and race you wouldn't be whining so much and making up fake things!

you also would be able to make coherent posts. rather than contradicting yourself

"No it's not. The first paragraph of the movie's Wikipedia page CLEARLY SAYS that the movie is a TRIBUTE to the original Django from 1966:"

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

My main point was never debunked. If someone did that to the Shaft movie, weather a remake or a tribute, it would have been a huge controversy.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

here's the definition of a franchise/ series you dummy

"A film series or movie series (also referred to as a film franchise or movie franchise) is a collection of related films in succession that share the same fictional universe, or are marketed as a series."

oh look! unchained isnt any of those!

-not marketed as a series
-not in the same fictional universe
-not the same character

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Irrelevant. My original point stands.

Let's say I make a movie named "Shaft" that is a tribute to the ordinal Shaft movie, it's still a crime movie, and it has the same theme song, but I change the race from Black to White. Would that be race swapping? Would there be a controversy??? Do you really think there would have been no controversy?

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

your own words :)

"No it's not. The first paragraph of the movie's Wikipedia page CLEARLY SAYS that the movie is a TRIBUTE to the original Django from 1966:"

they didn't say it's clearly a remake, or clearly part of the franchise. it's a TRIBUTE.

ill await your apology

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Still avoiding my main point.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

your point has shifted 4 times now.

YOU have avoided YOUR point because I disproved your nonsense.

and you also did too!!

your own words hahah

"No it's not. The first paragraph of the movie's Wikipedia page CLEARLY SAYS that the movie is a TRIBUTE to the original Django from 1966:"

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

My main point stands. If someone changed the race of the Shaft movie, weather it's a remake or just a tribute with the same theme song, there would have been a hellstorm of controversy. But if its done against Whites' it's OK.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

your main point doesnt stand! because that wasnt your main OP.

nor was it when you said its a remake, nor sequel hahahah. you've moved the goalpost again

"No it's not. The first paragraph of the movie's Wikipedia page CLEARLY SAYS that the movie is a TRIBUTE to the original Django from 1966:"

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

My main point was that they race swapped the character Django. That point stands. If someone did that to a Black character it would have been a huge controversy.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

"No it's not. The first paragraph of the movie's Wikipedia page CLEARLY SAYS that the movie is a TRIBUTE to the original Django from 1966:"

its a different character, with the same name. glad you re admitting you are wrong!

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

The movies are heavily related. They race swapped the character Django.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

little victim

"No it's not. The first paragraph of the movie's Wikipedia page CLEARLY SAYS that the movie is a TRIBUTE to the original Django from 1966:"

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Yes and the movie IS RELATED To the ogirnal. They race swapped the character named Django. It's not a different movie that just happens to have the same title.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

you said it was a different film!! its a tribute! your own words

"No it's not. The first paragraph of the movie's Wikipedia page CLEARLY SAYS that the movie is a TRIBUTE to the original Django from 1966:"

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Yes and it's part of the same Django brand. They race swapped the main character. If someone did that to Shaft movie weather a remake or just a tribute there would have been a huge controversy.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

hahahah now its "brand"

im done here. go be the victim elsewhere!

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Yes and that's the point. If someone did that to the Shaft movie, weather a remake or just a tribute , it would have been a hellstorm.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 2 years ago

lOL rereading this. your actually said that a tribute is in its own franchise. hahahahah

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 2 years ago

I made a valid point. If a tribute was made to a Shaft movie with the main character played by a White guy, there would have been an enormous controversy.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

"No it's not. The first paragraph of the movie's Wikipedia page CLEARLY SAYS that the movie is a TRIBUTE to the original Django from 1966:"

little victim

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

When will you actually address my main point that I brought as early as my OP.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

im done here. go be the racist victim elsewhere. I am guessing your girl got stolen or you got beat up by a black guy. and since you are a weak loser this is your only outlet to feel powerful in life.

never forget though! you disproved yourself!

"No it's not. The first paragraph of the movie's Wikipedia page CLEARLY SAYS that the movie is a TRIBUTE to the original Django from 1966:"

see! not a remake! its a tribute similar to a homage.

dumb ass

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Hahaha still repeating yourself, using ad hominem fallacy and avoiding my main point.

If someone did that to the Shaft movie, weather a remake or just a tribute, it would have been a hellstorm.

reply

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

victim life

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Legitimate grievances and victim mentality are not the same thing.

reply

[–] Galactus03 (4399) 3 years ago

Why are you so racist???🤔

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

I'm just punching back at the anti White left. Why don't you complain to the left why are they so racist against Whites?

reply

[–] Ranb (11190) 3 years ago

No you're not. You are making up an issue to justify complaining about nothing.

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Entire society is anti White, you're just blind to see it.

reply

[–] Ranb (11190) 3 years ago

Explain why you're anti-white. You are part of society.

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

So if the media is anti White, the academia is anti White and the entertainment industry is anti White, it's still not enough to say society is anti White? Name me one influential institution that is pro White. Even the military embraced the diversity, equity and inclusion nonsense.

reply

[–] Ranb (11190) 3 years ago

You're being evasive. You claimed that the "entire society" (this would include you) is anti-white. I want to know why you claim to be anti-white and why your position is bad.

"The media" is a very broad term. Does it include rabidly racist/pro-white forums like Stormfront? Does it include Qanon?

The KKK is pro-white and it seems that you align with their insane racist rhetoric perfectly.

You seem to be very uninvolved in society in general and nearly completely unaware of what is happening in this world when trying to convince us that you are not aware of these groups.

Do you want our military to go back to rejecting all non-whites?

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Hahaha Qanon and KKK. That's your examples?? I said name me one influential institution that is pro White. Meanwhile every influential institution is pro Black, pro multiculturalism and diversity, equity and inclusion (which just means less White people)

reply

[–] Ranb (11190) 3 years ago

I figured you to be one that hung to their every word.

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Stealing characters from others races. How is that not Black people behaving like leeches?

reply

[–] Ranb (11190) 3 years ago

Django (1966) was set near Mexico during the civil war and involves a plot to steal gold. Django Unchained (2012) is set in Tennessee and Mississippi in 1958 and involves two bounty hunters who try to free Django's lover from a plantation. Completely different plots if you ask me. Two different characters.

You make it sound like it is the "blacks" fault for being in this film. While QT pays homage by using one song from the 1966 film and a cameo appearance by one of the same actors, it is not a remake at all.

Seems like you're getting yourself all worked up for nothing.

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

If someone did that a Black character like The Shaft - even if it was just a homage, not a remake - everyone would complain bout the race swap.

reply

[–] Ranb (11190) 3 years ago

You are not everyone, but you are having delusions of grandeur.

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Seriously dude? That's your argument? Me using a bit of hyperbole to make a point? If they did that to any Black character there would be a huge controversy. My point stands.

reply

[–] Ranb (11190) 3 years ago

Yes, that is my argument. You could admit that you are wrong instead of blaming anyone else.

How is it that you're not aware of something called whitewashing? It is hugely popular to change a person of color from the source material to a white person when adapting it to the screen. It is not limited only whites, but whitewashing is more common.

Some examples would include;
The Last Airbender
Annihilation
Ghost in the Shell
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
Doctor Strange
Pan
Edge of Tomorrow
Star Trek into Darkness
The Lone Ranger
Hunger Games
The Dark Knight Rises
Prince of Persia
Speed Racer
Bringing Down the House
30 Days of Night
Batman Begins
The Human Stain
Pay it Forward

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

There's not such thing as Whitewashing, moron. Changing race for practical reasons is totally different from doing so for ideological ones.

reply

[–] Ranb (11190) 3 years ago

Wow, you're the first person I've ever seen who claimed there is no such thing as whitewashing. What film ever whitewashed for practical reasons?

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Every so called "Whitewashing" was done for practical reasons. If Chinese make a remake of Billy the Kid for Chinese market, he and almost everyone in the film will be Chinese. It has nothing to do with ideology. If a movie like Prince of Persia is made by Americans (who at the time were 80% White adult population) aimed for WESTERN markets, logically the actors are going to be mostly White. How many famous Iranian actors do you know in Hollywood? Every major Hollywood picture costs tens of millions to make. Of course it needs FAMOUS actors to make a return of investment. Meanwhile replacing Whites with Blacks (like Annie, Karate Kid, Heimdall in Thor...etc) is done for pure ideology.

reply

[–] Ranb (11190) 3 years ago

So if it is practical, it is not whitewashing?

So how do you define whitewashing? I think everyone but you defines whitewashing as a "casting practice in which white actors are cast in non-white roles".

reply

[–] OvertonPendulum (4026) 3 years ago

Totally evading my point, eh? The REASONS why matter. Nobody should be bothered by chancing race for practical reasons. It has nothing to do with anti Black or anti brown ideology. Hollywood is in the business of making MONEY. It should be understandable. Meanwhile Blackwashing has everything to do with ideology. They didn't have to change the race of Karate Kid. Whites are evil oppressors, so they have to be replaced by non Whites.

reply