Talk:Django Unchained

"Snow White And The Seven Dwarfs"

Does anyone recognize the "Seven Dwarfs" and "Snow White" in the Hillybilly Trackers whose dogs killed D'Artagnan? In the quite surreal scene where Django killed the bearded guys in their hut, i counted eight people, seven men and the mysterious women with the scarf before her face. The scene seemed so surreal to me, because one guy was repairing a bird's house in the same rhythm that three other guys played cards. The women (seemed to be a blonde one) looked at three-dimensional pics with a special viewer. One was sitting in a rocking chair, one in a bathing tub, and one was in the attic of the little hut. That makes seven guys and that very mean looking girl. 93.201.43.108 (talk) 20:19, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Makes a lot of sense. Great observation. Thanks for this!24.152.130.45 (talk) 06:52, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Wiki is not a forum, try IMDB, Rottentomatoes, somewhere film focused. Cheers, Ma®©usBritish^{chat} 20:35, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

MOS

The lead section, specifically this part "from a cruel and charismatic plantation owner" violates the MOS. I can't exactly remember which part, it may have been the weasel words section or something similar. Point is, we need to change that sentence so it is less subjective. Retrolord (talk) 12:35, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

You probably mean WP:LABEL, but given that this is a film article, and that it describes a character's traits, it is probably important.. you wouldn't avoid describing a Bond villain as "cruel and charismatic" just because they label the character, just as you wouldn't avoid using words like "evil" to describe some of Tolkein's characters. If the description is how the character is portrayed, then it would not be biased, or a violation of MOS, because this isn't a BIO and so there is no real-life controversy. Ma®©usBritish^{chat} 02:38, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Mandingo fighting- historical accuracy section

I don't understand this, I've read the same review in a number of places which suggests slaves weren't organised to fight each other (from one professor's comment that they never heard of it). Yet information about the fighter Tom Molineaux suggests this did happen. It seems a clear contradiction. I can understand if there was absolutely nothing to suggest it ever happened (which still wouldn't mean it didn't), but there is an example of it happening. There are a number of news articles stating that Molineaux won his freedom through fighting other slaves. 137.111.13.200 (talk) 00:58, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

The whole Historical Accuracy section needs to go IMO and be merged into another one, people are abusing it like the film is a historical documentary when its nothing of the sort, it loosely occurs within the same universe as Pulp Fiction and Inglorious Basterds where a group of soldiers wasted Hitler in a theater. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 01:06, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree. The mandingo fighting part doesn't seem relevant, in light of reports that such fights did take place. If then the argument is that they weren't gladiator style, or to the death, what is the point that is being made? Who said they were gladiator style and were specifically to the death? The reference to the KKK has been pointed out as a reference to before the infancy of the KKK, so how would it be historically accurate? The whole section seems pointless.137.111.13.200 (talk) 06:13, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

The "historical accuracy" section is a sub-section of "controversy". Clearly there have been critical remarks made of the film relating to gladitorial fights and the KKK, and the editors have used this section to put the record straight, using quotes and citations. The points being made aim to show that though the movie is set during a specific time and place, the events do not reflect historical reality and iit is therefore supposed to be fictional. The problem with critics, is that most of them are idiots who often fail to see the woods for the trees.. overpaid by the media to sit on their backsides and watch movies, and most of the time they totally miss the point, or allow their personal biases and misconceptions to guide their review. It seems someone has obviously been bitching about there not having been these fights or a KKK clan "in real life", and Tarantino's response is "this is not based on real life". This section is particularly useful, per WP:INUNIVERSE, as Westerns are often satirical, despite their historical origins, so this section negates any chances of original research being added claiming the movie was based on actual events. Ma®©usBritish^{chat} 07:11, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

I understand, but from the source cited Blight was only saying that gladiatorial fights to the death were not recorded, not that fights themselves were never recorded. It is one thing to say that fights never occurred, which is plainly wrong. It is another to say that they did occur, but that the specific events in the film are fictional, which is an entirely pointless thing to say. The section needs to be tightened up to be more specific about what has been deemed inaccurate.137.111.13.200 (talk) 23:51, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

FWIW, several examples cited, including old illustration, and specific example of fight to the death: "In a WPA interview, ex-slave Cecilia Chappel remembered hearing a story about a slave named Fedd who lived on a nearby plantation [...] Whether Fedd beat the man to death or the patrollers killed him for poor performance is unclear. As is the ultimate fate of Fedd." Folsom, Brad. "Did Mandingo Fighting Really Happen?" History Banter. June 12, 2013. https://web.archive.org/web/20130803102334/https://historybanter.com/did-mandingo-fighting-really-happen/ 2603:7081:3200:582D:5966:169C:FDC6:3F01 (talk) 14:58, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

German protagonist

I was wondering why the main White character had to be German. Dr. Schultz, it appears to me, was chosen because of the previous Tarantino's movie, so after "demonizing" the Germans, they are presented in a favourable light. Just a wild guess. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Historienne2012 (talk • contribs) 08:20, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Here just a couple of wild answers: 1) Broomhilda also spoke German. 2) Brunhilde/Broomhilda had to be freed from a ring of fire, i.e. slavery. 3) Germans, especially in the early 1800s, can get very philosophical/romantic. 4) Germans are good at going on guilt trips. 5) Waltz is a darn good actor - bet on a winning horse. Alandeus (talk) 08:40, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

In contributing to the above contribution, the Germans and the Irish were the majority of the immigrants from Europe for about the next 50 years. (The Irish much more so in the later 19th century and early 20th.) Germany at the time was also a very notable center of philosophy (Immanuel Kant, Critique of Pure Reason's author, is a notable example of comtemporary philosophy) but also was advanced in the world of mathematics and science at the time. It would probably be historically accurate to present a learned man (Schultz was a dentist) as a well rounded individual versed in religion and philosophy to some degree. (To support this idea, he speaks several languages. Most immigrants to America only spoke two.)207.65.70.194 (talk) 03:22, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

It is of course another spoof to put Landa, uhm, Schultz in that protagonists role. A german doctor would have been somewhat safe among english, irish or french americans, because of his european heritage. Back in the early 19th century science, culture and craftmanship were already a given - yet (much) older facets of belligerence, aggression and emotional coldness (humoral pathology) were a given too. A bipolar morality based on law and order and a sense of retributional justice too defines the characterisation of Schultz, maybe he had a real bad conscience because of what he may have done in 1848. The key scene i.m.O. was the denied handshake - every german viewer knew, that Schulz would not shake Candy's hand...Candy claimed it to be a custom closing deals, yet it appeared he knew the german meaning of "Peace and Friendship" of that gesture too. The whole Broomhilda-theme was odd, yet original - the mythologic Brunhilde was the most powerfull woman, who got fooled by the german hero Siegfried. Django was quite the opposite of the latter, smart, diligent, self-made a.s.o.--85.178.169.121 (talk) 02:58, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

I like to think of Schultz as a '48er - a veteran of (and exile on account of) the 1848 Revolution. Davecampbell (talk) 03:40, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Use of Violence

The topic of violence in Django Unchained has been discussed widely in the media. I think this topic belongs in the article. I put a section in with a quote from Thomas Frank, who is a well regarded writer. This topic and the quote were removed, but I am going to restore them. The topic belongs in this article. I welcome more quotes concerning this topic. Chisme (talk) 22:50, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

I gave you a quote in the edit summary. Why does this one person require an entire section and why do you need to commit a copyvio to copy and paste a huge chunk of text about this one person's opinion? Darkwarriorblake (talk) 22:56, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

We're supposed to give people's opinions in Wikipedia articles. I enlarged the section and put another quote in it. Rather than cut quotes, why not enlarge the section? Find some quotes from experts or critics that give different takes on the violence in this movie. (Not sure what you meant by "I gave you a quote.") Chisme (talk) 23:18, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Why does this have a "historical inaccuracies" section?

Just checked inglorious basterds and it didn't have this section. Is there something amiss here? Since when were films treated to a "historical inaccuracy" reception on wikipedia? Or any other venue? Who was advertising the film as historically accurate?

The plot centers around the so-called Mandingo fighting. Quentin Tarantino said in interview about Mandingo fighting, "I was always aware those things existed."[1] In fact, there is no historical evidence that slave owners ever staged fights to the death between male slaves. Jamie Foxx said that "This is the truest depiction of slavery"[2]. Stephen Marche wrote: "The amazing thing about watching all this is that it's all perfectly Tarantinoesque, but it's also for the most part historically accurate."[3] Richard Brody writes: "Tarantino rightly depicts slavery as no mere administrative ownership but a grievous and monstrous infliction of cruelty. The movie shows slaves forced into fights to the death for the entertainment of owners, and one fighter ripped to death by dogs when he refuses another fight. Whipping, branding, cruel punishment, and casual murder are the lot of slaves and the caprice of owners..."[4]. In fact, Mississippi's law prohibited the "cruel or unusual punishment" of a slave, including unnecessary and excessive whipping. Like any slaveholding society, there were good and bad slave masters:

Mississippi: A Documentary History, pp. 70—72, Smith Simmons's childhood memories: "I can remember good and well going out with one of Master's sons and catching birds under a trap and cooking them in the field. ... Master blowed the horn at daylight for the field hands to get up. At sundown the work stopped. When the hands came in from the fields, they could do what so ever they pleased. Master sure wasn't hard on nobody. There was very little punishment that went on; if any of the slaves ever got whipped I is never heared of it. ... It was very seldom a slave ever ran off. My oldest brother tried that once. He was caught by the patrollers and brought back so quick he never tried that no more."[5]

Since when were films treated to a "historical inaccuracy" reception on wikipedia? See Braveheart, 300, Gladiator, Gangs of New York, Apocalypto, The Alamo, The Patriot, Amazing Grace, Kingdom of Heaven, Rome, or The Passion of the Christ. Tobby72 (talk) 22:47, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, did you just advance the position that slaves weren't whipped? I may have misunderstood, but that seems to be what you are intimating. As for slaves not being made to fight to the death, that is clearly a different issue than being made to fight at all. The screenplay includes dialogue whereupon the matter of Big Fred having beaten his opponent to death was broached, with the suggestion that it was more than was expected. Why mention that he beat the man to death if winning automatically meant the opponent would die? So it seems it is a strawman to say that gladiatorial fights to the death are not historically accurate, because the movie did not suggest that such fights were specifically arranged, but rather than the circumstances of the fight lead to that (eyes being removed tends to lead to the inability to fight). That slaves were pitted to fight other slaves is, however, a matter of record. Tom Molineaux being one such example.137.111.13.200 (talk) 03:54, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Whipping was the most common form of slave punishment. It survived in some U.S. prisons and juvenile institutions even into the second half of the 20th century.[6] There's a huge difference between boxing match and brutal fight to the death. Tom Molineaux was an African American boxer, born a slave in Virginia. He won his freedom in a boxing match. Tarantino said: "I was always aware those things existed. Mandingo fighting, which is what we call it, was part of the underbelly of slavery. It would be a perfect vice for Candie to indulge in, watching two men are fighting to death like dogs."[7] Tobby72 (talk) 18:36, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Butch killed his boxing opponent in Pulp Fiction too, I don't recall there being an issue with artistic licence there. You have yourself made reference to the fact that slaves were made to box each other. That the Candie character watched a fight to the death illustrates the depravity of the character, and the audience is left to entertain the notion that such fights probably did take place, given the historical backdrop of slaves being made to fight each other (Tom Molineaux, as you have reinforced, for example). To make the suggestion that slave fighting is historically inaccurate by referencing the specific fight to the death in the film seems like a linguistic sleight of hand. Or is it merely the suggestion that the exact fight that occurred in the film did not occur in real life? What exactly is the point of all this?137.111.13.200 (talk) 02:08, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Regarding The Boston Globe's Wesley Morris comparing Samuel L. Jackson's Stephen character to black Republicans like Clarence Thomas or Herman Cain, maybe some people ought to read A History Lesson From Clarence Thomas (Correcting a liberal smear about the conservative Supreme Court justice) by Damon W. Root, Reason, April 2013: "It was not the first time a liberal writer had taken a cheap shot at the conservative Supreme Court justice. … the comparison to the slave power system was particularly contemptible, especially because no Supreme Court justice since Thurgood Marshall has written more frequently or powerfully about American racism than Thomas. … Many of his critics may be too ignorant to know it, but Thomas’ writings are steeped in African-American history and grapple repeatedly with the long shadow cast by slavery and Jim Crow. He may not be a modern liberal, but there is no question that Clarence Thomas is part of a civil rights tradition that started with Frederick Douglass." Asteriks (talk) 12:59, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

How is that relevant to this section?137.111.13.200 (talk) 02:20, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Regarding previous statements about 'punishment and murder of slaves', pray tell, how exactly is this ever documented anywhere? On the off chance that a man of the law is in the vicinity of a ranch a hundred miles away from the nearest town, who is going to snitch on their boss? The self owned and well paid henchmen? The slaves kept in the area? There is no way that this NEVER took place just because there was a law stating it to be illegal, as there would be no registration of breaking this law in most of the cases. 2001:610:1908:8000:20EA:2893:B002:4293 (talk) 12:13, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

German language co-original

I'm wondering why the fact German is a substantial part of that movie's very story is against better judgement stubbornly not admitted here.
1. The plot's logic is partly based on some of the (including one of the two protagonists, accidentally an Austrian actor) characters speaking German. (Furthermore, even Django's rescuing his wife in the end is a reminiscence to the earlier this movie depicted Nibelungenlied).
2. There's a German word every now and then in the film -- due to the plot, not by chance.
3. last but not least A nearly five minutes dialogue in German between Dr. Schultz and Brunhilde (what a random name --> compare Nibelungenlied) as a decisive aspect of the storyboard.
I mean, just because some time in the movie there's a "bonsoir" I do not intend to put French in the list of languages, but the case of German is most different here.
I am now looking forward to hearing some of the "watchmen" here bring their funny definitions of "significant". Another thing, always important amongst anglophones: even if you couldn't understand -- it is really German what they speak :-p 150.161.208.55 (talk) 18:38, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Just so it's clear, the IP wishes to add German to the language parameter in {{infobox film}} because there is some sporadic German spoken in the film. I've even explained on the IP's talk page that the template says not to do this, but ...--Bbb23 (talk) 18:43, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Just so it's clear: Before writing about or assessing a movie in any kind of a way, simply watch it.150.161.208.55 (talk) 19:13, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

How many Westerns that feature Mexicans are considered co-original Spanish? Some “Si señor” and “¡Caramba!” doesn’t qualify even if the vaqueros occasionally have subtitles. German culture is used as an auxiliary plot device here and the language is used a ploy as a secret code. Additionally, the few minutes of ‘dialog’ is basically a monologue held by Dr. Schultz with Brunhilde giving just curt responses. No, for a film to be co-original, the other language(s) really should be much longer than just five minutes. Alandeus (talk) 08:21, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

It's all explained at the infobox documentation: "Only in rare cases of clearly bilingual or multilingual films, enter separate entries with a line break". This is not a multilingual film, it just has some German in it. --Rob Sinden (talk) 08:23, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

This does not need to be categorized as German or billingual, but in its current version, this article entirely obmits the fact that German is spoken at several points in the film, and the language's relevance to the plot. -- Imladros (talk) 00:40, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Leading, Major or Supporting Actor

Dr. Schultz, played by Christoph Waltz, is the major character of the film besides Django. So, there is no way to define this role as "supporting actor". However, why did the Academy twist the rules and categories in this case? Have they been bribed by the Austrian state as perhaps sometimes before, considering the extreme amount of Awards for Austrians in the last years? Did Schwarzenegger, the governor, have the last word in this decision? Discordion (talk) 16:03, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Discordion, this is what I found. It appears to be about how The Weinstein Company campaigned for nominations. This in November 2012 mentioned the possibility of campaigning for Waltz as Best Actor, but this the following December says the TWC would instead campaign for Waltz as Best Supporting Actor. Hope that helps! No Austrian conspiracy here. Erik (talk | contribs) 16:54, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

In popular culture

This section is a bit backwards, normally these sections refer to influences a film has on other aspects of popular culture, not the things in popular culture that influenced the film. What is described is a historical influence, and a character that informed the writing of Tarantino, so this should be mentioned under Writing, or Prodction if anywhere. -- 109.79.100.59 (talk) 00:07, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

• Agree. I suggest this section be removed. Unless there is some serious protest, I'll remove it by the end of the week. Alandeus (talk) 11:13, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

I was only suggesting it be retitled and moved. Deleting is easy, fixing is hard. -- 109.79.121.186 (talk) 13:31, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Casting Audition

Actor Tyrese Gibson send in an audition tape for the role of Django. Source: Video: Exclusive Never Before Seen: Tyrese's Django Unchained Audition!. DepressedPer (talk) 8:47, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Action Figure Controvery

I seem to remember there being a brouhaha about "Django Unchained" dolls. They were boycotted by Al Sharpton or something? Banned from eBay, I think? A friend of mine says her Sam Jackson doll is worth hundreds of dollars, so I came to Wikipedia to learn more. Disappointed to find nothing.24.152.130.45 (talk) 05:04, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

[8] Beats Ken and Barbie hands down. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:30, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Cut hand

IMBD trivia says: "When Leonardo DiCaprio's character Calvin Candie smashes the palm of his hand on the dinner table, the actor broke a glass under his hand and really began to bleed. DiCaprio ignored it, stayed in character, and continued with the scene. This take was the one used in the film." Is this true? Martinevans123 (talk) 10:28, 26 December 2014 (UTC) If true, might even have made a good hook for DYK!

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Django Unchained/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Metal121 (talk · contribs) 13:58, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

'Django Unchained' is broad in it's coverage. The article is clearly well written, with no noticeable issues with grammar and/or spelling. The article gets straight to the point with no irrelevant or pointless information. It also contains a fair view of the article's subject overall, with no bias views being represented. From looking at the article's history, I can see that the editing doesn't change significantly at any given periods of time. There are no 'editing wars' currently on-going in the article, and so far the edits seem to be reasonable and beneficial (overall) to the quality of the article. The illustrated pictures are all abiding by the relevant legal aspects of Wikipedia, and don't appear to be breaking any laws. The article is also well referenced with a variety of reliable sources. I can see no issues whatsoever with this article as it currently stands, and for this I feel that the article meets the requirements to be labelled a 'good article'. I am happy to say that this article (in my opinion) can be immediately passed as a 'good article', though other reviewers are welcome to give their reviews too, and all opinions are valued. To all who have contributed to this article's content, well done!.

Hello Metal121, what's going on? Did article passed the nom or still in the review? --Captain Assassin! ^{«T ♦ C ♦ G»} 16:52, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

It looks like it was listed as a GA a few minutes after this review was initially posted. However, that shouldn't have happened while there was a "citation needed" template remaining on the article, which is one of those things that should always be identified for fixing by a reviewer. Captain Assassin!, can you please take care of that? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:20, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Yeah sure, but I'm really confused here BlueMoonset. Reviewer just passed the nom without even informing me (nominator). So, I'm confused about that, should I re-nominate it, ask another reviewer to come take a look or we'll keep it as a passed GA now? --Captain Assassin! ^{«T ♦ C ♦ G»} 16:27, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

The bot normally would do the notification, but because the nomination was passed within minutes of the review being posted, I think all that got short-circuited. (The bot didn't even get a chance to transclude the review on the article talk page, which you later had to do manually.) I think what I'd advise is to leave it as a GA for now—definitely don't renominate—but ask someone at WT:GAN to take a look to confirm it's okay (or make suggestions here to get it there if it's not); this was a first GA review by someone who did about 200 edits in 2012, and has done another 300+ in the last couple of months. As such, I think it's useful to get an experienced eye on it, though I don't think we need a formal reassessment, so long as any issues raised are promptly dealt with. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:50, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Okay then, I'll leave it as it is. If any issues raised, it will be dealt at the time, thanks for your time. --Captain Assassin! ^{«T ♦ C ♦ G»} 16:59, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Note: This was also discussed at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations#Django Unchained suspect review. Prhartcom (talk) 05:55, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

I have copy edited the article under the auspices of the Guild of Copy Editors, at the request of Captain Assassin!. In my opinion, the prose quality is adequate to meet the relevant GA criterion. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:32, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you so much Jonesey95. Now the article is officially GA. --Captain Assassin! ^{«T ♦ C ♦ G»} 10:25, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

"Candyland" or "Candieland"

Tarantino's script has it spelled "Candyland" ( http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/Django.pdf throughout, example: actual page 84, hand written page number 82) User:Sock has reverted that spelling, saying the captioning and the scene selection say "Candieland".

Given a difference between what we know Tarantino did (write the screenplay) and the captioning and scene text on the DVD (of unknown genesis and something done post-production by unknown people) I'm going to have to go with the spelling in Tarantino's screenplay.

Both spellings are common on the internet. I have not done a numerical comparison, though.

Restoring "Candyland", as it is the way Tarantino spelled it. Marteau (talk) 03:17, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Academic Response and the special issue of Safundi

I would like to advocate inclusion of the robust critical response to Django Unchained by academic scholars. This was posted and removed last week:

An entire issue of the academic journal Safundi devoted to Django Unchained: "Django Unchained and the Global Western," featuring scholars who contextualize Tarantino's film as a classic "western"

I've been looking through the articles and they are very interesting. To wit:

"Tarantino’s film is immensely entertaining, not despite but because it is so very audacious—even, at times, downright lurid, thanks to its treatment of slavery, race relations, and that staple of the Western, violence. No doubt these are matters that another director would have handled more delicately, and with less stylistic excess, than Tarantino, who has never been bashful. Another director also would have been less willing to proclaim his film the first in a new genre, the “Southern”—a proclamation that has irritated some viewers of Django Unchained, and is challenged several times here.

As the four original essays, and the responses, gathered in this issue illustrate, Tarantino’s shameless combination of Hollywood values with an irreverent treatment of hot-button topics is provocative, and in a multitude of ways. If I had to sum up these ways, I would argue that the problem that Django Unchained presents to its would-be interpreters has to do with the near impossibility of contextualizing the film in terms that capture its richness—and its excessiveness—without sacrificing a sense of that richness and excessiveness to one’s own interests (as a film buff, a scholar of race, literature, and culture, a person of colour, or what have you)." Many literary works on Wikipedia include a section on scholarly response. I think that films who provoke a scholarly response should too. Safundi is an important academic journal. 162.129.251.88 (talk) 12:41, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Django Unchained. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100612165922/http://nbrmp.org/awards/ to http://www.nbrmp.org/awards/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:46, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Django Unchained. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/rza-would-have-played-his-character-from-the-man-with-the-iron-fists-in-django-unchained-20121022
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://collider.com/django-unchained-jonah-hill/173404/
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.decapost.com/entertainment/2012/12/31/django-unchained-was-more-than-a-role-for-kerry-washington_s_3821107.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130223005411/http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/12/21/3152097/tarantino-talks-django-unchained.html to http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/12/21/3152097/tarantino-talks-django-unchained.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121223071138/http://www.sacbee.com:80/2012/12/10/5044486/american-film-institute-announces.html to http://www.sacbee.com/2012/12/10/5044486/american-film-institute-announces.html
• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6DZOQ92zN?url=http%3A%2F%2Foscar.go.com%2Fnominees to http://oscar.go.com/nominees

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:33, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Django Unchained. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/21224/kevin-costner-joins-tarantino-s-unchained
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130111022127/http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2013/01/django_unchained.html to http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2013/01/django_unchained.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://oscar.go.com/nominees

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:44, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Django Unchained. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130105120309/http://popcultureblog.dallasnews.com/2012/12/in-honor-of-django-unchained-a-look-at-a-dozen-spaghetti-westerns-worth-your-time.html/ to http://popcultureblog.dallasnews.com/2012/12/in-honor-of-django-unchained-a-look-at-a-dozen-spaghetti-westerns-worth-your-time.html/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130319130412/http://www.naacpimageawards.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/44th-NIA-Nominations_Final_Release.pdf to http://www.naacpimageawards.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/44th-NIA-Nominations_Final_Release.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:41, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Mandingo Fights

@TheOldJacobite: This is primarily for you other editors feel free to join. If you're willing to remove "brutal wrestling matches" as well I am willing to back off. The best way to describe if you insist on using what the movie says is simply brutal fights. I'm still not sure why you insist on it being only what's included in the film when there is no policy to back it up, especially if I can find a source that Quinten Tarantino intentionally made it look like an MMA fight. I might have gone about this the wrong way and I do apologize but at the same time you only recently appeared willing to work towards a consensus. I want to reach a consensus on this that we can agree to and hopefully other editors can chime in on.--Rockchalk717 23:57, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

• I don't care one way or another, but let me offer you some help: If you are wanting to compare the fight scene to "mixed martial arts", then you must find a source or two that does this. For us to just say "it looks like mixed martial arts" is clearly WP:original research and not allowed. So my suggestion is that you find some sources that back this up, and THEN you can begin the discussion. Until then, there is nothing to talk about as the addition would be against policy. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 00:53, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

What would make sense, and I think this might be the only compromise we can reach, is to use the wording you suggest – "brutal fights" seems completely accurate – and then create a subsection in the production section in which you use sources to say that that Tarantino's intention was to the fights look like MMA. This should work. ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 02:41, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm ok with that actually. I'll get to work on finding some sources saying that. I remember finding a website talking about how unlikely such a thing actually existed because it would be unlikely slave owners would have used their strongest slaves for something like. I'll see if I can find it again. I'm glad we could come up with an agreement.--Rockchalk717 03:58, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Great! Yes, as much as Tarantino loves talking about his films, there has to be something out there. I'm glad we reached a compromise. ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 13:03, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

piped links in lede

The three piped links on Academy Award in the lede should be rewritten in some way. The current impression when glancing at it is that Academy Award has been linked three times, which is silly. Surely, these can be rewritten to be more descriptive. ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 16:08, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Bass Reeves

Was the movie loosely based on the story of Bass Reeves, the person that the Lone Ranger was based on? 47.148.0.212 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 20:04, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Drum

Was Django Unchained inspired by Drum (1976 film) because both films are very similar. They have a lot in common such as slave rebellions and slave fights also the non-historical term "Mandingo" for a fine fight or a breeding slave is used a lot in Django Unchained but Tarantino didn't just come up with the name himself, he got it from the 1975 film Mandingo which is a prequel to Drum. 2.25.253.203 (talk) 16:12, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Stephen's surname

Samuel L. Jackson's character is currently listed as "Stephen Warren" in the Cast section of this article. However, I don't think Stephen is ever identified as Warren in the movie. My best guess is that this is the result of some Wikipedia editor's baseless attempt to connect Stephen with Marquis Warren, another character portrayed by Jackson, from Tarantino's later film The Hateful Eight. However, if that's it and there's no official statement about Stephen's surname being Warren, it should be removed from the article. Lullebulle1234 (talk) 12:32, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Fixed --FMSky (talk) 17:04, 28 October 2024 (UTC)