Django Unchained

Why the fuck did Schultz kill Candie? Was he retarded?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=pcy7qV-BGF4
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Same reason the Civil War started. Politeness only goes so far when dealing with racists.

He got outplayed and even when candie was going to let them go schultz had too much pride to admit defeat to someone he viewed as despicable and a fool.

>One side of the civil war was racist while the other was not.

No you retard, you're supposed to ask "why didn't he shake candie's hand"
And the first replay should've been "because schultz the dentist hates candie"
Fuck you reddi/tv/, can't even get the dailypastas right anymore

Because Tarantino :

1. Wanted a big climatic shootout where the plantation owners die, and

2. Also wrote some good characters into a corner.

The only solution was to have them do something stupid and out of character to get his big shootout.

That depicted exchange is certifiably Plebbit though. Either answer my question or get the fuck out of my thread

Short answer: yes
Long answer: no, just German

You nailed it.

I can't, my hands are a little dirty

>out of character
Are you actually retarded? Schultz killed the 2 slave traders in the opening scene. He also killed the fake sheriff. And he and Django killed the 3 slavers at the plantation.

Can you imagine the fucking Kinógraphy if the film just ended with Schultz, Django and Broomhilda leaving Candieland rather than a meme shootout? Tarantino would have entered the pantheon of Gods

Yeah, killed them when they had the clear upper hand and no one else around or were otherwise legally justified in doing it.

Would have been great but plebs wouldn't get it.

We forgetting the north still viewed niggers as lesser beings?

Nah, Schultz just hates slavers and loves killing them. It's just very convenient when he has the law on his side while doing it. But it's not out of character for him to kill a slaver who had just fed a black man to his dogs.

>the primary cause for the civil war wasn't slavery

At least they paid them wages, faggot.

Isn't it cute when Sup Forumstards try to rewrite history?

I don't get how some people never got why he didn't shake hands. It wasn't a matter of logic, it was a matter of principle.

I'll explain the actual reason that Schultz, the character, did not shake Candie's hand.

It has to do with his character flaw, that being his principles and the emotive weight he gives them. A similar question to this would be "why the fuck did he help out a black dude track down his wife with no guarantee of success?"

Because of his strong belief in his principles, he acts upon them. He saw parallels between the german story and Django, and made an irrational decisions based on the strength of his principles.

Finally the character flaw comes to a head when implored by candie to shake his hand, in many ways, endorsing his behavior. When his principles are called into question, schultz acts exactly the way his character would.

>people actually believe this
Fucking plebs.

Still racism retard
>wages
Hardly enough to eat or raise their bastard nigglets, you dolt. The south fed their slaves and treated them like animals, the north paid them little to nothing and treated them as lesser beings, pick your poison.

here's a link buddy youtube.com/watch?v=pcy7qV-BGF4

>moving the goalposts
KEK

Finally, someone answered it. I've seen this same thread made multiple times, and the answer is obvious if you just watched the movie.

GET THE FUCK OUT OF MY THREAD AND STOP DERAILING IT

He had enough of Candie's bullshit.

At the 30minute mark?

No, about 2hrs 11 minutes into the movie

Because tarantino

you are insane. please have your doctor check your amygdala immediately.

>believing that Django threads aren't code for "civil war was really caused by tariffs guys" threads
heh, I was once like you. Cute.

It was a matter of principal. Shaking someone's hand makes you their equal.

Shultz was physically repulsed by Candie and everything he stood for as a human being, and then that human who was going to go on and torture more slaves, was forcing him to shake his hand and expert his will over him.

As a good person he couldn't do it.

Why didn't Schultz just shake his hand?

Germans are a people of great caliber and respectability, it is true.

So am I.

How did you start a new thread within a thread?
this nigga knows how to thread

There wouldn't have been a character arch for Django at all.

We were already two threads deep, but your post just took use another thread down.

Yeah, like that principle to go in there and rob him...

>DONT TALK ABOUT THINGS I DONT WANT YOU TO TALK ABOUT ON A FORUM I DONT CONTROL

>the evil white men and women slave owners dindu nuttin

Yeah, it was real unprincipled of him to steal a slave prostitute away from Candie so she could go back to her husband

>robbing from an incestuous slave-owning American from dixieland is wrong
From a cultured German's point of view the guy is barely human

This is still so fucking stupid. Schultz could've just shaken his hand, walked out of there alive, then set fire to the place later at night and shot everyone as they tried to escape.

And why the fuck did he have to go under the pretense of buying a fighting slave to also buy Django's wife?

>I speak German, and I heard that there's a slave here who also speaks German. I will pay a large price for her as a German-speaking slave is pretty much a unicorn.

I hated the end of this movie. It was just stupid. Needless virtue signaling instead of the characters being smart and getting out alive. Not to mention he had no idea Django would make it out alive. He condemned them both to die after the whole movie trying to set Django free with his love. Fuck it makes me so mad.

>People believe this.

>Cold blooded murderer
>Good person
You know you can't just decide you are the judge jury and executioner and hand out righteous vengeance because you have a hunch your ideas are better.

Literally everyone viewed blacks as subhuman, Lincoln wanted them all sent back to Africa

Because his character is unironically consistent with narcissistic personality disorder and the loss to Candie was the ultimate humiliation so he engaged in absolute self destruction

This part made me hate the movie and made everything after seem so cheap. He could have done better than this.

>>believing that Django threads aren't code for "civil war was really caused by tariffs guys" threads
>heh, I was once like you. Cute.

>It was a matter of principal. Shaking someone's hand makes you their equal.

>Shultz was physically repulsed by Candie and everything he stood for as a human being, and then that human who was going to go on and torture more slaves, was forcing him to shake his hand and expert his will over him.

>As a good person he couldn't do it.

>Because his character is unironically consistent with narcissistic personality disorder and the loss to Candie was the ultimate humiliation so he engaged in absolute self destruction

Because Tarantino inadvertently made him the hero of the story, which is probably also why the movie ran on way longer than it should have - needed time for Django to actually do something without Schultz holding his hand.

Dentists and candy don't mix.

You only look at it that way because of a modern perspective.

The point of this is that Schultz looked at it from a lawful perspective any they figured it was not going to happen... because why? And then he is concerned about nigger blasting his way in there and taking her back, and now law is an issue to them. So, their only recourse, of course, is to break the law? How does that make any sense?

Yeah, Candie was a piece of shit, but the only reason they got into that situation was because they decided not to try the logical and lawful thing first for some stupid reason.

What should have happened, and what probably wouldn't have made it an interesting movie, is that Schultz sucked it up, befriended Candie in the bar, maybe got invited back to Candie's place, and they made a deal because he liked the german speaking girl... and nigger is left behind and not even brought into the equation because he was clearly a dopey hothead.

This, Django is one of those rare movies where the constant gory violence was a drawback.
If Tarantino really wanted that shootout he should have made up a better reason.

Its simply not believable that Schulz, so infatuated with helping Django reunite with Brunhilda, would suddenly go full retard and jeopardize them all.
He was already beaten, if he wanted to kill Candie, it would have been simple to come back later and finish the job.

If people in Tarantino movies did things lawfully and logically, they'd be extremely boring movies

>thinks the civil war was about slavery

Well they wouldn't be classified as action, for sure. If Schultz just did , everyone would have got out alive and happy. It'd be more of a drama, I guess.

>All men are created equal.
>I won't even grudgingly shake your hand because I consider you beneath me.

Ah.
So it's like Inglorious Bastards.
It's an ironically heroic characterization of the obvious hypocrisy.
>It's okay to be a soulless merciless psychopathic killer if you only kill nazis.
>It's okay to treat people who are okay with slavery as subhuman.