Please pay attention to me. It's been, like, a decade since my art has mattered and I'm very settled into my new role as someone newspapers call up when they're looking to pull controversy from thin air
Thanks Spike, keep up the great work!
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Matata For This Useful Post:
Back in 1997,Lee told the media he had problem with Tarantino's "excessive use of the n-word" in the movie "Jackie Brown." Lee explained, "Let the record state that I never said that he cannot use that word -- I’ve used that word in many of my films -- but I think something is wrong with him."
While I don't see it as offensive in the context, I kind of see Lee's point.
This is the 3rd movie where Tarantino has gone out of his way to use the word excessively. Maybe it's beyond just context, and Tarantino has some sort of strange fixation on continually using it.
Spike Lee just likes to pick a fight. Go on his Wiki page. His controversies are longer that his film credits.
"In June 2003 Lee sought an injunction against Spike TV to prevent them from using his nickname. Lee claimed that because of his fame, viewers would think he was associated with the new channel"
He's also traded words with Eastwood over not enough black soldiers in "Flags of Our Fathers".
I'm curious though, how much was it really used back then? Obviously it was more accepted back then, but did people throw it around willy-nilly like they do these days? I obviously can only speculate, but I wonder if the fact that the word is taboo has actually caused it to be overused on modern times. I would not be surprised at all if Tarantino uses it way more often and in misused contexts than what would have been normal in the 1800s.
For those who don't know who he was, Ware was born into slavery in the mid-1800s and was freed after the Civil War. He was an expert horseman and cattleman. He eventually made his way to Texas and got a job driving cattle to the north. He is credited with being the man who introduced Texas Longhorns to Southern Alberta.
He was a very well-liked and well-respected man in the ranching community. They say that when he died, he had the largest funeral Southern Alberta had seen up to that point.
There are a number of things around Southern Alberta named in his honour including John Ware Ridge, Ware Creek, Mount Ware. There's a building at SAIT named in his honour, and I attended John Ware Jr. High in Calgary many years ago.
As you can see in the Wikipedia link, before it was renamed, John Ware Ridge used to be called ###### John Ridge. Even though the biographies of him have been written with modern sensibilities in mind, based on the writings of the day, everyone called him ###### John.
It's likely that even people who knew him well and considered themselves friends probably didn't actually know his last name and didn't give a second thought to calling him ###### John. Based on the context, it doesn't appear that it was used in a derogatory way towards Ware, it was just what everyone called him.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to getbak For This Useful Post:
wonder what Samuel L. Jackson has to think about this?
__________________
Thank you for everything CP. Good memories and thankful for everything that has been done to help me out. I will no longer take part on these boards. Take care, Go Flames Go.
There are a number of things around Southern Alberta named in his honour including John Ware Ridge, Ware Creek, Mount Ware. There's a building at SAIT named in his honour, and I attended John Ware Jr. High in Calgary many years ago.
Haven't seen the flick, is it in any way derogatory to blacks? i.e. Inglorious Basterds had Hitler and jew killing, I can't remember if jews were angry?
I don't recall any blowback over IB. The last time I remember any big brouhaha over a movie, other than the vampire/Harry Potter stuff getting the xians knickers all in a knot, was the massive fuss over Passion of the Christ, and Catholics getting all up in arms over Dan Brown's stuff, but I think with the Dan Brown stuff, that was more the books than the movies.
...to do movies that deal with America's horrible past with slavery and stuff but do them like spaghetti westerns, not like big issue movies.
This quote from Tarantino goes to why Spike Lee is upset with this film. Spike Lee has said that he has a problem with Tarantino treating a tragic part of history as a spaghetti western. Nowhere in any of the interviews has Spike brought up the n-word issue, obviously from the past we know he has that issue, but how about some discussion of whether this movie deals with slavery with respect?
As for his issue with the n-word:
Quote:
“The problem with Jackie Brown,” Spike Lee reportedly said. “I will say it again and again. I have a definite problem with Quentin Tarantino’s excessive use of the n-word. And let the record show that I never said that he can not use that word-I’ve used that word in many of my films-but I think something is wrong with him. You look at Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs and even that thing with Christian Slater, True Romance. It’s just the n-word, the n-word, the n-word. He says he grew up on Blaxploitation films and that they were his favorite films but he has to realize that those films do not speak to the breadth of the entire African-American experience. I mean the guy’s just stupid. [Tarantino] said he and Ricki Lake were the two most revered white celebrities among the black community. Where did he get that from? Because Sam Jackson kisses his butt, that means black people love him? That’s wrong. I am not the only African-American in this world who has a problem with this excessive use of the n-word.”
Spike Lee's issue with Flags of our Father was the lack of black troops in the movie, which I think is a good point. There were black troops at Iwo Jima. Of course Eastwood came back with his smart ass response about having a black person hold up the flag which would historically inaccurate, rather than actually discuss why he didn't include black soldiers in the film. IMO an appropriate response would have been "You know I didn't really think about it. I was in no way trying to be disrespectful of the black men who laid their lives on the line in the Pacific War, but it just never occurred to me"
Also, if you listen to Spike Lee speak you would also know that he isn't that biggest fan of the majority of rappers. He thinks those who objectify women, rap about money, cars and glorify violence are damaging black youth. So you are right he wouldn't be a fan of rap artists.
Maybe I am a little bias as I don't really like many of Tarantino's films (Reservoir Dogs, True Romance, IG were good and I expect to like Django Unchained, the rest I'm kinda meh on). I think Spike Lee and Clint Eastwood make way more interesting films.
Last edited by FlamingLonghorn; 12-24-2012 at 06:02 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to FlamingLonghorn For This Useful Post:
Haven't seen the flick, is it in any way derogatory to blacks? i.e. Inglorious Basterds had Hitler and jew killing, I can't remember if jews were angry? I figured this movie was similar in that it showed a slave kicking ass against the baddies the same way....
I don't think he uses the term as derogatory since it seems that Tarantino truly wishes he was black. Imitation/flattery type of thing.
People are going to get offended at Hot Fireman calendars anyway, I say he just completely ignores the 'controversy'. He's at the point of his career when he can.
I believe this film is kinda supposed to be in the same vein as Inglorious Basterds, just in the slavery motive.
Tarantino said that he wanted Inglorious Basterds to be a sort of revenge film for Jews, he had talked about the idea to people for many years. You see a lot of war and holocaust films, but you always know how they end and who ends up getting screwed (to put it extremely mildly). I think this movie is to have the same feel for the slaves depicted. But of course to truly depict both groups, you have to show just how horrible they had it.
I'm not sure if any Jewish groups protested the film. I didn't hear about it. I know some that really liked the idea. We all want to see the Jews kick ass after we've watched them get tortured and shot and thrown in ovens for 3 hours. Of course, I wouldn't be surprised if there were some groups that didn't like the idea. There's always a few it seems. Would claim the same sort of thing, not taking a serious subject serious enough or handling it with enough respect.
