Weird that they made him gay in this one. That was the one part that was a little too strange for me. Maybe I'm just not used to seeing him like that. He's a great actor, but I didn't see it.
GQ
[deleted]
No. It was the truth. He knew his name and hair color.
GQ
His character in Django may have been but this was a way to torture someone mentally and physically before killing them.
shareBut there's MANY ways to do that! Why was gay porn the FIRST thing that came to Tarantino's mind ?!
Amazing Fact: Thor 2 outgrossed Winter Soldier in 72% of the territories, and sold more Blu rays.
Hahah maybe so, the Pulp Fiction scene, the balls scene in Django. Maybe QT has a thing for that lol.
shareThe oral rape wasn't meant to indicate that SLJ's character is gay. His erection in that scene was born of sadistic pleasure, not necessarily born of erotic pleasure. It was an act of humiliation, stemming from hate. Ever see PENITENTIARY? It's a '70s blaxploitation prison film that I bet Tarantino admires. The oral rape bit reminded me of a scene in that film in which the hero - a small-ish straight guy - is about to be raped by his hulking cellmate. Our hero fends off the cellmate's attacks, beats him up and rapes him anally, all the while shouting to his eavesdropping fellow prisoners about what he's doing in the hope that no one will mess with him after that. Does that make him gay? I say it doesn't. Are the two scenes similar? I say they are, if only because they're "homosexual" acts perpetrated by male characters who are otherwise categorically straight.
shareWhat gives you the impression Jackson was categorically straight? He made no reference to dating or being interested in women and the only sex act we saw him participate in was a homosexual act.
Do I think his character would identify as gay? Probably not. Homosexuality is stigmatized in our culture, and particularly so a hundred and some odd years ago. But do I think he was a gay man? Yes.
You can split hairs all you want, but I find these weak excuses to be more homophobic than anything. You seemingly cannot accept that this badass masculine character might be homosexual. I agree it was bad storytelling and didn't quite work. But heavens sake, if you get off on gay sex it is not out of line to assume you are a gay man.
GQ
Was the guy who raped your ass in prison gay?
"Digital Filmmaking" is an oxymoron #film #realfilm #Super8mm #16mm #35mm #70mm #filmforever
If someone were to rape my ass in prison, yes I would say they were gay.
The fact that you find sexual assault funny or a good way to conquer somebody says more about you than anything.
GQ
You should walk away from the keyboard, because now the things you are saying don't even make sense. But please Mr. Gravytrain, if you only type one more thing, please tell us how old you,are, where you were educated, what you studied, and what you do for a living.
"Digital Filmmaking" is an oxymoron #film #realfilm #Super8mm #16mm #35mm #70mm #filmforever
Uh, I told you this stuff already.
I studied at the North Carolina School of the Arts. I graduated from the film school. Peter Bogdanovich taught there.
I am 39 years old.
I am a working screenwriter, both film and television. I have written for shows on HBO, FX, Comedy Central and others.
GQ
No, you didn't say this before, not to me anyway. What makes me doubt your story, is the crap you write here. You act like a neanderthal.
"Digital Filmmaking" is an oxymoron #film #realfilm #Super8mm #16mm #35mm #70mm #filmforever
How exactly do I act like a neanderthal?
GQ
Ummm, this thread you started?
"Digital Filmmaking" is an oxymoron #film #realfilm #Super8mm #16mm #35mm #70mm #filmforever
So by me not liking a creative choice the filmmaker made, I'm a neanderthal? That's pretty silly, surf501.
All this anger because someone interpreted the movie a little differently than you. Very strange.
GQ
No, it's your *beep* homophobic *beep*
"Digital Filmmaking" is an oxymoron #film #realfilm #Super8mm #16mm #35mm #70mm #filmforever
"I agree it was bad storytelling and didn't quite work."
Who are you agreeing with? You're responding to my post, right? I never said it "didn't quite work". I love the scene, and unlike you I didn't feel it was played for laughs. It's very serious business and was intended to be viewed as such.
Regarding your bit about how Jackson's character was never portrayed as being straight, you do have a point... But I maintain that the forced BJ scene doesn't serve as evidence that he was gay. If anything, I'm in agreement with other posters who claim that his physical arousal stemmed from his hatred for his victim and not due to a general lust for men, which is what I wrote in my first post. I'm fairly certain that if the character was meant to be perceived as homosexual there would have been at least one more indication of that.
This is the most embarrassing thread on this board. If you want an opinion (though I should not dignify it with one)- here one is. A) the story may or may not be true to start with. 2) to suggest one instance of something (purely NOT for erotic pleasure in this instance) makes someone anything is very ignorant. 3) What the hell is wrong with gay??
shareStrange how you seem to glom on to the "what's wrong with gay?" meme but then say Jackson wasn't gay but doing it for some reason other than his own erotic pleasure. It seems he was blown to completion, does it not?
You're right, nothing is wrong with gay, but in this case the gay man in question was a rapist. And that is decidedly not cool. Rape played for laughs is not really too amusing in my book. Tarantino thinks its super funny apparently, and so do lots of people. But keep in mind, for the rape scene to work as you say, as mere sadistic humiliation, you must embrace the idea that gay sex is "icky." How is that not offensive?
GQ
He did it for REVENGE- not because he wanted a blowjob. Surely you aren't that dense? Rape is certainly disgusting and slavery is too. This was his nasty revenge for the nasty things that happened (if the story is even true). Regardless, he knew this would be enough to make a racist mad as hell! Everything you keep writing is quite flawed in a point. It is quite hard to take you seriously. Gay has nothing to do with it- whether he was or wasn't. The fact you care in this aspect says everything about you
shareHard to imagine getting revenge on somebody like that. How did he get aroused if he didn't want the blowjob?
GQ
The revenge was the arousal. The blowjob was just in between.
--------------------------------------
Death is the standard breach for a complex prize.
I'd suggest you do some research on rape.
"Digital Filmmaking" is an oxymoron #film #realfilm #Super8mm #16mm #35mm #70mm #filmforever
And the victim in question's father was a general for the Confederacy, who represented the kind of ignorant hate that is just below the surface of pretty much all of your posts. The fact that the son went there looking to kill the man is also a factor. The idea that it was "played for laughs" is entirely subjective. Obviously you didn't find it very funny, and neither did many other people, which is fine. The last thing Warren says to Smithers before inciting the old man into drawing the gun is:
"Starting to see pictures, ain't ya'? Your son. Black dudes dingus in his mouth. Him shivern' - him cryin' - me laughin - him not understandin'. But you understand, doncha' Sandy? I never did give your boy that blanket. Even after all he did, and he did everything I asked. No blanket. That blanket was just a heart breakin' liar's promise. Sorta' like when the union issued those colored troopers uniforms....that you chose not to acknowledge.
So what are you gonna' do old man? You gonna' spend the next two or three days ignoring the *beep* who killed your boy? Ignoring how I made him suffer? Ignoring the agony I inflicted? Ignoring how I made him luck all over my Johnson? Yep', the dumbest thing your boy ever did, was let me know he was your boy."
If you don't see why Warren did what he did, whether you agree with it or not, you're either an idiot or an attention-seeking troll. My guess is that you're probably a bit of both.
And the victim in question's father was a general for the Confederacy, who represented the kind of ignorant hate that is just below the surface of pretty much all of your posts.
Oh boy. I'm dying to hear this one. Pray tell, how are my posts in any way representative of the Confederacy or the "ignorant hate" they espoused? You're the one cheering on a rape as it was just desserts or some cool kind of revenge. The ignorant and hateful person is you.
GQ
The subtext in your posts is that there is something inherently wrong with homosexual sex. You didn't care for it and you don't see Samuel L. Jackson "that way". And where did you get the idea that I'm the one "cheering on a rape"? You clearly have never taken a debate class before, and if you did, you certainly didn't pay a whole lot of attention or do very well. As I said, it's pretty obvious, from some of the other posts that you've made, that you didn't particularly care for this film. Now you're just trying to stir up controversy to get the affirmation and attention that is clearly lacking in your everyday life. It's pathetic and embarrassing. As far as my being ignorant and hateful goes, whatever you say champ.
shareA debate class? Is that the extent of your life experience? I now see why you have such a problem with people who disagree with you about movies, because you're a child who lacks real world experience.
I never said there was anything wrong with it. I said it wasn't a convincing performance from an otherwise very competent actor. So I blame the writing and directing more than Jackson. I feel the scene was put in for simple shock value and titillation.
It seemed to me you were cheering on the rape because you said yourself you loved the scene. You also said because the victim was the son of a Confederate general he deserved to be raped. Sorry, but whenever somebody is raped, regardless of who it is, the rapist comes off worse than the victim.
GQ
I have no problem with those who disagree with me about movies. What I do have a problem with are people that grossly misrepresent a film's ideas, practically claiming something as objective as art to be fact, and then continuing to be deliberately obtuse to further their own agenda. It must be difficult for you to acknowledge the idea that this writing and directing is going to leave more of legacy than anything you've ever worked on, or will ever work on, which I'd love to hear all about.
shareI'm sure you would love that.
But I have no problem acknowledging Tarantino's admirable legacy as a filmmaker. I think he's great. I just don't love some of his more juvenile tendencies and frequent lack of depth.
GQ
Again, it really must be difficult for you to acknowledge a writer and director, arguably working at the top of his game, while you, in all likelihood, are just struggling to survive. It's a perfectly human reaction to be bitter and jealous. I'd love to see the depth you've brought to some of the projects you've written for.
shareAgain, I don't begrudge Tarantino his success. He's made many great films over the years and he deserves it.
While I am nowhere near as successful as Tarantino, I make a very good living, which I am thankful for.
GQ
You know what the most beautiful thing about all of this is to me? Tarantino has clearly succeeded in exploiting and manipulating his audience, almost to the extent that Warren did to Smithers. Yes, I loved the scene, and it stands out to me as one of the most memorable in recent film history. That doesn't mean that I condone torture or non-consensual sex, by the way.
shareIt's no secret I didn't like the scene, but aside from just not caring for it, I think it was uninspired of Tarantino to include it here. I mean, it's almost exactly like Marcellus Wallace getting raped by the rednecks in Pulp Fiction, only without the tables turning at the end. Gay interracial sex assault played for shock and uncomfortable laughter. Check.
shareThis scene was, to me, meant as a metaphor for reparations for the dehumanization and slavery of Blacks in this country's history, as I've said. Smithers was meant to represent the systemic, systematic ignorance and racism that is still very much apart of our society, and likely always will be as long as our species exists. It was nothing like the scene in Pulp Fiction. In fact, the message was exactly the opposite. There's a lot of subtext all over this film, if you'd care to look, but you're a successful writer of film and television, so I shouldn't have to tell you that.
shareTarantino is not known for his subtlety. About the only thing he's ever subtle about are his film "references." He usually only cops to those when people spot the material he steals.
No, you usually just get what you see in Tarantino films.
GQ
Well, the subtext in this film wasn't very subtle to me, or to many professional film critics either. It seems to be lost on you, and many of the other people on this message board though, unfortunately. You can say you usually just get what you see in Tarantino films. I think that's more a fault of yours as an audience member, particularly one claiming to be a successful writer, than it is of his. The work is the work. It speaks for itself, or, for you, and many others, it doesn't.
Here's a very long, well thought article about this scene, if you can manage to take a break from your obviously busy career as a successful writer for film and television to read it. Take caution though, as it might challenge your beliefs:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2015/12/29/samuel_l_jackson_s_hateful_eight_monologue_about_forcing_the_general_s_son.html
Don't get me wrong, I think he's a great filmmaker. Tarantino has many qualities and some of the things that he does well, he does better than anyone else.
His movies are usually an awesome experience. Raw, loaded with kinetic energy. He has a gift for dialogue and colorful characters. The way he captures southern California is particularly interesting to me. It's so spot-on and unlike any other filmed representations. LA, a city so often filmed but rarely captured in such a rich and insightful way.
I wish he'd do another crime movie set in LA.
GQ
I didn't ask you what you thought of him as filmmaker, and I honestly don't care.
shareSheesh, bud. Calm down. Just putting it out there.
GQ
Yeah, you're just putting something, that I don't remember asking for, out there, in a bit of an apologist's tone, while ignoring everything else that I'm asking you to consider. Also, I am most certainly not your "bud".
shareNot at all, man. I was just making my way through the Slate article you linked and posted some quick thoughts in the meantime. Certainly didn't mean to ignore your insights.
I see what you are saying about Tarantino's riffing on race relations and Black masculinity in his films. I admit I found it interesting in Pulp Fiction many years ago, but his continued fascination with it I find a little weird. Just like his infatuation with women's feet. Doesn't make me hate him or anything. Just a little weird is all.
GQ
If he's subtle about his references, as you say, why are you also implying it's easy to spot him for stealing material? You're a writer; aren't you supposed to know, like, I dunno, "words?"
shareWill someone put their peen in Grady's mouth to shut him up! 😒
shareThat's a sweet avatar, wheresjoeysmovie. Are you the guy in the front or the guy in the back?
GQ
LOL. I think that's what Gravytrain really wants. That's why he's so hung up on the scene.
"Digital Filmmaking" is an oxymoron #film #realfilm #Super8mm #16mm #35mm #70mm #filmforever