Click to Skip Ad
Closing in...

Cast Of 'Roots' Responds To Quentin Tarantino's Diss Of The Landmark Miniseries

by Tambay A. Obenson
February 6, 2013 12:37 PM
  • |

On Monday the Museum of the Moving Image's ongoing Changing the Picture series of screenings and discussions here in NYC, which celebrates and explores the work of film and television artists of color, presented Making Roots, Making TV History - a discussion with Ben VereenLou Gossett Jr.LeVar Burton, and Leslie Uggams (stars of the landmark television miniseries) on the show’s production and its long-lasting legacy.

The discussion was moderated by Donald ThomsVice President of Programming for PBSpresented in collaboration with Pioneers of Television, the four-part PBS series which premiered on WNET/Thirteen January 15, 2013.

The episode on Roots aired last night, February 5 at 8pm, and to plug this new celebration of the mini-series, Vereen, Gossett, Burton and Uggams stopped by the Wendy Williams Show yesterday morning, to talk and reminisce about Roots as a TV event, and also working on the production.

As you'd expect, Django Unchained came up, given all the comparisons that have been made between Roots and Django Unchained (which I never quite understood). But more specifically, Wendy asked them to respond to Tarantino's quote (during his press tour for Django) in which he pretty much pissed on Roots, calling it inauthentic, stating:

“When you look at Roots, nothing about it rings true in the storytelling, and none of the performances ring true for me either... I didn’t see it when it first came on, but when I did I couldn’t get over how oversimplified they made everything about that time. It didn’t move me because it claimed to be something it wasn’t.”

Naturally, that didn't sit well with some. We never really addressed that comment here on S&A, but I figured we'd exhausted Django Unchained chatter, and so didn't bother. BUT, I post this because this is the very first time that the cast of Roots has publicly responded to Tarantino's quote; at least, this is the first time that I'm aware of them responding. If they have before, and done so collectively as they did on Wendy's show, then I missed it. 

So I thought this was worth sharing...

  • |
Free Indie Movies and Documentaries    


  • Gerard Freeman | October 27, 2013 6:07 PMReply

    I like to see a 3 hour Roots remake on the big screen. John Singleton, Tarantino, and Spike Lee should get together on this one would be nice. :-)

  • getthesenets | February 14, 2013 4:30 PMReply

    UPDATE 3/14/13

    John Singleton weighs in publicly on Django

    Oscar-nominated director John Singleton (Boyz n the Hood) told a Toronto audience if he was making a movie about slavery, unlike Django Unchained’s comic-western tack, it would be “a horror movie.”

    Singleton, who was in Toronto Tuesday for a Canadian Film CentreBlack History Month event, was asked to respond to filmmaker Spike Lee’s recent dismissal of Quentin Tarantino’s Oscar-nominated drama as being “disrespectful to my ancestors.”

    The story of a freed slave (Jamie Foxx) who teams with a German bounty hunter (Christoph Waltz) as a means of finding his wife after she is sold to a ruthless plantation owner is nominated for Best Picture, Best Original Screenplay, Best Cinematography and Best Supporting actor for Waltz.

    Singleton, the first black man and the youngest person (at age 24) to be nominated for a Best Director Oscar, made the comments towards the end of the onstage conversation at TIFF Bell Lightbox with CBC radio host Garvia Bailey, in response to a question for the audience on his feelings about the controversial film.

    “I’m happy he (Tarantino) made the movie,” said Singleton, who said he’s seen Django Unchained three times. “It works as a western. It’s a great western. I respect what Spike is saying and he and I talked about it last week. I think privately a lot of black filmmakers, some of them don’t want to speak out, but I think they’re pissed off because nobody is going to give somebody black 100 million to do a movie like that.”

    Added Singleton, “I’m not mad because I made Rosewood.”

    The 1997 drama is based on the true story of an African-American community that stands up to a racist white mob in the 1920s and stars Jon Voight, Ving Rhames and Don Cheadle.

    Singleton said Django Unchained was “soft” compared to the historic reality of the period for blacks in America.

    “I don’t think we’ll ever get a movie in this generation that really . . . if I was going to do a movie about that period it would be a horror movie. I don’t think I could do it in a way people would want to see it because I would make it so truthful.”

  • L. Calvin | February 11, 2013 11:40 PMReply

    I love Tarantino's work. However on the criticism of Roots, he is just wrong. Now he and Spike Lee have something in common. Opinions based on false perceptions. The Roots cast and Wendy handled it with class. Tarantino is very entertaining but he has never done anything near the quality of Roots. Time and relevance have spoken on this matter.

  • Mindart77 | February 26, 2013 3:00 AM

    Very true L. Calvin. Unfortunately, Quentin Tarantino has often falsely mistaken his experience of growing up in a household with a Black Stepfather, as one that provided him with a firsthand knowledge of what it was like to have the same type of negative "Black Experience" that most African-American males as subjected to in the still bigoted United States. However, that's just not the case for QT, so he'd do better to keep his mouth shut before inserting foot.
    Now I will admit that I'm an artistic fan ot both Tarantino's & Spike Lee's films which I find very entertaining. However, it is becoming harder for me to sit through either director's films, after they both have repeatedly engaged in personal blunders by popping-off their mouths with insensitive & uninformed ignorant comments that warrant more research and consideration, before opening and inserting foot.

  • CareyCarey | February 11, 2013 11:46 AMReply

    WOW-WEEEEEE! I've been entertained by the comments. Yep, there's nothing like sitting on the front porch watching a neighborhood brouhaha. I wish S&A used a system that allowed us the opportunity to actually see the fisticuffs. I'd pay money to see wigs and bras being snatched off. Are you kidding me, come on now, am I the only one who waits patiently for the coup de gras of school yard battles?

    Shiiiiiiit, when the conversations heat up... when she said, she said... when name calling reaches a fever pitch, I know wigs and titties are about to take flight. Shiiiit, ain't no shame, I might even stir the pot with words of encouragement... "guuurl, you right, I wouldn't let nobody talk to me like that"

    But today I'm gonna chill and blame it all on Tambay. He had to know this would cause another firestorm... wouldn't you think? I mean, come on. We're talkin' gossiping big titty Wendy and old has been actors Chicken George & Fiddler and the films Django & Roots. Shiiiiit, that's a gumbo of disaster.

    Yep, in short, I am reminded of Mumbles in the movie Dick Tracy.... "Rigwoydidit... Wig woy idit... Big Boy Tambay did it."

    But, read on because there are a few women getting it on -- throwing down!(below) - and one never knows. *wink*

  • eshowoman | February 11, 2013 12:13 AMReply

    QT seems to forget that before Roots, there no was realistic representation on TV about blacks in the antebellum South. TV broadcasts of Gone with the Wind, Jezebel and other films of that ilk were the only glimpses slavery on the boob tube. Films like those reinforced the idea that slaves were happy with their plight and broadcasting a miniseries that began to dismantle that myth was a huge gamble. The miniseries was as authentic as was going to get in the mid-1970s, but it changed how a generation thought about slavery. Django Unchained is not going to do that. QT is an arrogant sod who has no grasp of black or media history.

  • TAZ | February 10, 2013 9:41 AMReply

    Okay, so I have read the comments and watched the clip. I also searched and found an article from the initial press tour that seems to set up the quote noted above. I suggest you do the same. In reading the article in full context, I completely understand what QT AND RH was saying and why it doesn't have much to do with what ya'll are yapping fact, the article above should have had more clarifying statements and because it does not, I have to give a side eye to the author. Neither QT or RH, IMHO, was trying to rain hate on these actors or take away their accomplishment. It was not even discussed. What was discussed was the goal of 'detailing' slavery in a way that Roots did not. If there were any comparisons.....that was it. If Wendy was a real journalist, she might have asked Ben Vereen how he felt as a black man when he did the whipping scene. I, for one, would have loved to know if he agreed with the script. Heck, I would wanted to know simply because Ben has said they were filming before the dang book came out and he didn't know much about history of slavery because all they taught back then (before the 60's) was that we were slaves and Lincoln freed us. If you don't know HIStory, HERstory, YOUR family, culture are doomed to do and say a lot of dumb shyt.

    CONTEXT young people....CONTEXT!

    That said, again, no one is really trying to knock the accomplishment and courage of doing Roots in 1976-77. No one is knocking the emotional connection or experience these actors had. Or truly belittle Roots and everything and everyone connected to it and its historical place on film.

    HOWEVER, it was 1976-77, the subject was slavery and if you think white folks don't like to deal or be accountable for slavery now, imagine how it was back then. HELLO.....10-15 years before we were strange fruit and targets. Imagine how HOLLYWOOD was back then. If you think for one second that ROOTS depicted slavery as it was or how we really felt when our great, great grands and great grands were sold, raped, killed, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.......then you got another silly thought coming. And Silly Rabbit, Trix is for kids. For those who saw the movie, toss out the comedy, bounty hunting, prostitution and polite talk at the dinner table, then tell me what you have? Do you think it was more in tune to what slavery was like? I believe that was all QT and RH was trying to show...slavery less hollywood, more real.

    Actually, I think it is a damn shame that this is the first time I have heard ANYONE have an opinion about how it is totally inauthentic for us to portray Chicken George as a saint when he had opportunity to whip his slave master. Like only Nat Turner was the only revengeful black man in those days ..........and you are complaining Hollywood portrays us, coonery, etc. etc. ..........what? Hmm, now that I think about it, his name seems rather appropriate and I ain't talking about Nat.

    GT?OH with that BS.

  • tyron tackett | February 11, 2013 6:06 PM

    RIGHT ON TAZ!!!!


  • getthesenets | February 11, 2013 12:57 AM


    After your soliloquy about context, had to pull your card about "chicken george whipping his slave master"

    If you put as much energy into seeing reading what some of the issues people have with qt, or into knowing what the facts are, as you do in bending over to defend him, you'd make better informed comments.

    Agree or disagree, I respect a viewpoint that is informed

    Speaking of which, if you really wanted to'd read that qt has made comments about roots in at least one different setting(probably more). the tavis smiley interview, with excerpts way below, tavis alludes to a Q&A interview that henry louis gates did with qt. Tavis said that the subject of roots came up...and gates didn't call him on his negative comments

    Interview is up at theroot dot com

    I'm almost certain that qt goes in further on roots and that gates just shuffles
    Also certain that he repeats his negative views of roots in other promotion for Django, but you probably have an excuse for that also.

  • TAZ | February 10, 2013 11:54 PM

    Hey CareyCarey! Totally agree, except even then some will hold on for dear life! Reminds me of two songs: Kenny Rogers, I think the song was the Gambler? (lol, don't judge. My mom loves Kenny and she embarrassed me a lot cranking Kenny and Lenny up in the ghetto) and En Vogue, Free your mind. Both songs went through my mind as I went through responses that I decided was a waste of time to submit.

    Until the next topic,


  • monkeysuit | February 10, 2013 9:33 PM

    I'm from Haiti too so don't get it twisted. Ain't nobody drawing strength from a flippin film. I don't even think it was that iconic. I just hate to see a good film hated on for reasons beyond its control.

  • Agent K | February 10, 2013 6:38 PM

    While I agree, I don't see that happening anytime soon.

  • BluTopaz | February 10, 2013 4:31 PM

    "I believe that was all QT and RH was trying to show...slavery less hollywood, more real. "

    ..because nothing is more realistic than a Black man shooting up White folks during slavery, with a James Brown soundtrack. And if tarantino is so invested in showing the real side of slavery and ALSO making an entertaining film by showing rebellion, why not adapt some real history that someone noted below? Why do you suppose Danny Glover has had so much difficulty trying to bring Toussaint's story to the screen for over a decade now? And it's not just because that's a Haitian story--Hollywood is always Americanizing stuff as necessary. Or what about the Nat Turner story? I know it's a downer at the end, but since everyone is now so concerned with being realistic about slavery and all.... I would love to see a good slave rebellion film. But understand that it's easier for Hollywood to accept a stylized, fictionalized Black sidekick with a funky soundtrack; and then folks have the nerve to complain about Roots being so unrealistic while tarantino gets accolades for doing whatever he wants. btw it will be so much fun to watch Tarantino and 5 other White men receive Oscars for telling our story while Jamie and Kerry applaud from the audience (that's more sarcasm for anyone who does not know). But my bad, Tarantino IS basing his next slave film on reality--he's doing a movie about John Brown "one of my biggest heroes" as he refers to him. At least he won't have to invent a White hero for his next slave adventure. I guess we can look forward to him criticizing Black people who led slave rebellions, and how he would have done it better.

  • CareyCarey | February 10, 2013 2:47 PM


    TAZ, you've completely killed this m***** f*****. Damn, you've left little to no wiggle room. Because of that, you could be charged with the crime of hitting midgets over the head with bricks.

    But taking a line from Blutopaz (even though I think we're on different sides of this debate) "I guess some people have to be hit over the head with a sledgehammer" before they tap the mat and cry uncle.

  • getthesenets | February 10, 2013 1:33 PM

    @Taz and @ Suit

    I expect ww and qt to continually make the mistake of confusing Chicken George with Tom...but not two people who have seen enough of Roots to feel comfortable labeling it as inauthentic the one given the whip to beat the night rider, not HIS former master.

    Chicken George,after being sold off to an English cockfighter and having lot of life experiences (war,business)....comes back to RESCUE his entire family from terrorism and neo-slavery....and hands the whip to his SON to exact revenge on the klan-ish night rider who beat and humiliated him in front of his family.

    Outsmarts, out thinks the whites who are trying to re-establish their dominance over 'uppity Blacks" and moves his family to another state to land that HE owns.

    But cartoonish fantasy revenge of Django was more "realistic" to qt..

    I know too much about Quilombo,Nat Turner,Maroons,Garifuna,Denmark Vescey,Cinque and the other rebellions and I'm from the island where the enslaved actually did overthrow the slavers. I'm also very aware of the resistance to colonization that my brothers and sisters on the continent fought
    So this "revenge film" Django is placed in it's context. It's just a film...I don't draw any strength from it or feel more like a man after having seen it.
    That's the impression I get from some of the people who are so adamant in their defense of qt.

  • monkeysuit | February 10, 2013 10:38 AM

    This is so true. Especially the Chicken George thing. There's this pervasive belief that all slaves were dumb and submissive when there are countless accounts of slaves rebelling in small and big ways. Frederick Douglass hit his master, and he never whipped him again. Aside from Sankofa, the portrayal of slaves have borderlined Sambo stereotypes like Prissy in Gone with the Wind.

    Roots is not exempt from this. I mean, really, why do y'all think it's so popular? You think white people wanted to see themselves as monsters and slaves as complete human beings?

    I agree that Tarantino's only getting away with Django because he's white, which is externally problematic. The piece itself does a good job with confronting the inhumanity if slavery. Yes, it's fucked up only a white man as popular and respected as Tarantino can do it. But that's doesn't make the movie fucked up.

  • cindy | February 7, 2013 11:31 PMReply

    The problem with this whole thing is... it would not have been a huge problem if QT didn't compare his movie to roots... whether you agreed with QT or the cast of Roots is irrelivent... qt should have spoken about his movie and what that meant to him instead of ragging on the "Roots" series, it had no real baring. QT can have his opinion yes... but so can everyone else. It's funny how the black folks taking up for Quentin sort of remind me of the actual slaves... one person "BLUTOPLAZ" even sounded like an old field slave that wants to get inside the masters house, and QT was his master. He ripped roots to shreds and latched on to the masters rendition. Like I said QT can say what he wants but he started this by comparing apples to oranges in the first place. So those QT lovers who can't see the forest from the trees... remember like many of you stated QT can give his opinion, but the opinions have to go both ways. You can't say that he can give his but no one else can... especially if they don't agree with yours. QT was wrong for even comparing the two movies and if you black folks can't see that... then I pity you because you have now become the slave and QT is your master...

  • monkeysuit | February 10, 2013 9:24 PM

    No, Sergio is generalizing. Sarcasm is equally misinterpreted (and used) by all races....atleast those in America. When you start crossing cultures... that's a different story. Sergio is basing his facts on thin air.

  • sergio | February 10, 2013 2:55 PM

    Sergio is wrong (shocker!) No Sergio is always

  • sergio | February 10, 2013 2:53 PM

    "Sergio mentioned something a few years back about how sarcasm, satire, etc. often escapes many Black people, for whatever reasons."

    Yes I said that and I still stand by that comment. Even more so. a lot of us take everything, even the most insipid remark, way too literally

  • BluTopaz | February 9, 2013 10:34 PM

    I guess some people have to be hit over the head with a sledgehammer.

  • getthesenets | February 9, 2013 8:05 PM

    agree with Cindy

    I thought the comments were trolling or attention seeking.

    format of the blog doesn't really lend itself to familiarity, not as much as a web forum.

    sarcasm is subtle

  • monkeysuit | February 9, 2013 6:36 PM

    Um, Chappelle? Sergio is wrong (shocker!). Black people aren't any less sarcastic or satirical than anyone else. Let her just be the slow one. Don't throw us all under the bus. kthxbye!

  • BluTopaz | February 9, 2013 6:25 PM

    @CINDY: "just to let you know that this is a serious issue in our culture."

    clutching the pearls... REALLLY?!! Say it ain't so!

    "Not understanding what you meant by "newbie" but FYI I'm a grown-up so newbie doesn't apply to me in any way, shape or form"

    It's always amazing to me when someone doesn't mind broadcasting how dumb they are, even anonymously. If you are unable to grasp that my comment was LAMPOONING (google that, since we know polysyllabic words escape you) slave catchers, then your happy simpleton behind can have a seat right next to them. And you let us know what grade you get on your Black Studies 101 class, 'k?

    @CAREY: Thanks man, and I remember you saying something like "yo momma" and it actually made me laugh. Sergio mentioned something a few years back about how sarcasm, satire, etc. often escapes many Black people, for whatever reasons. This chick here is Exhibit A.

  • CareyCarey | February 9, 2013 5:21 PM

    Ms. Cindy, Blutopaz and I have had our share of "battles". In the heat of debates, she has called me a handkerchief wearing lawn jockey and I might have said "yo' momma". But in the end, over the years, we've come to respect each other's opinions. I mean, we know where each other stands on the many issues that hit this board, so we don't go "there"... if we don't have to.

    So in her defense, when you call someone a field slave, you should expect some type of kick-back. And to be honest, her statement (that you apparently referenced) was easily recognizable as sarcasm to everyone except YOU. I mean, come on "Signed, Sycophant Negro Committee Who Stay Bragging About Being Played by Whitefolks"

    Duh.... who would brag about being played by white folks? Not to mention calling themselves a proud bootlicker? So, considering the fact that YOU called her out and YOU missed a fundamental form of sarcasm, the word "dummy" might be seen as a slap on the wrist.

  • cindy | February 9, 2013 3:54 PM

    Blutopaz... your comments just further prove to me that you are quite possibly an extremely immature person, thanks for that validation by the way. Your words don't really touch me, but I thought I'd respond just to let you know that this is a serious issue in our culture... inside and outside of the race, so overly reactive... maybe, but that is the trouble with my people... when it comes to important issues... we are not over reactive enough. By the way... didn't understand or get your sarcasm but I actually do understand what the word means. Not understanding what you meant by "newbie" but FYI I'm a grown-up so newbie doesn't apply to me in any way, shape or form... but again thanks! (sarcasm). Sarcasm or no I hate it when black folks allow others to be okay with telling us what our culture is about and what it should be about and being okay with it... it is indeed the slave and master mentality... anything to stay in good standing with the master, even though it will never really happen sorry, but it is. You have yourself a good day now...

  • BluTopaz | February 8, 2013 9:05 AM

    ALM: You are 100% correct. CINDY: You are an overly reactive newbie dummy who does not understand sarcasm.

  • ALM | February 7, 2013 11:53 PM

    Hi Cindy, I believe Blutopaz was being sarcastic, but Blutopaz will have to confirm if I am correct.

  • monkeysuit | February 7, 2013 5:59 PMReply

    I'm sorry, read a slave narrative and watch Roots right after. Tarantino is right. And he's not the first person to say so white or black. Historians have been criticizing Roots since it first premiered.

    Y'all acting like he called the cast niggers or something. He didn't like it for valid reasons. Big woop.

  • slice | March 18, 2013 7:55 AM

    Liberals and people who milk the system? You really there are no Republicans who do that? There are MANY liberals who work,pay taxes, and try to make the system work, so what the hell is your point--oh,wait a minute---YOU DON'T HAVE ONE! And I've liked the view for years---hell, the political debates are some of the best parts of the show. And to all you idiots whining about the show---don't watch it then! I'm sick of seeing the View based by fools simply because it's an all-female show, as if men have only interesting things to say all the time because they're men--newsflash--NO, they don't---not all the time!

  • monkeysuit | February 12, 2013 10:05 AM

    Omg, you are really ridiculous. When did I say black people were on a level playing field? I said up yonder:

    "I agree that Tarantino's only getting away with Django because he's white, which is externally problematic. The piece itself does a good job with confronting the inhumanity if slavery. Yes, it's fucked up only a white man as popular and respected as Tarantino can do it. But that's doesn't make the movie fucked up."

    Talk about deflection, man. You ain't even refuting my actual points. You're just coming up with some of your own.

    It is possible to like a movie while hating the system that produced that movie. It is possible to acknowledge white privilege in all its injustices without hating all the white people benefitting from it as well as the art that comes from it. That's called complex thought. It's a shame there has yet to be an adequate slave epic, and it's a deeper shame that black filmmakers struggle to tell stories like these-- or stories in general. But that doesn't make me hate Tarantino or the rest of the white filmmakers feasting at the top.

  • BluTopaz | February 12, 2013 12:49 AM


    No, you DEFLECTED from my question: I asked you specifically:"ask yourself if Spike or any other Black filmmaker, would ever be given the opportunity to make a mainstream film about the Holocaust after talking trash about Schindler's List." You went off on a tangent about why you think Roots sucks, and did not respond to the question. I should not have to "connect" anything, you should just answer the question as is. It's not a matter of having differing opinions/taste in films/etc.--I don't get Black people who don't acknowledge that we are not on a level playing field--and you want to defend arrogant, clueless clowns like Tarantino on top of it, and tell other Black people that it's a "non-issue".

  • BluTopaz | February 12, 2013 12:36 AM

    @ Carl: Isn't it time for you to meet up with your parole officer, nigga?

  • Donella | February 11, 2013 4:53 PM

    Getthesenets, I saw the blaxploitation doc too-Badassss Cinema. You're right. Tarantino was completely annoying, came across as a know-it-all and a smug jerk. His voice added not much to the discussion. Norm MacDonald did a bang-up job of mocking Tarantino's jerk mannerisms on Saturday Night Live. I laughed my head off and said, "Go get 'em, Norm." It may be on YouTube. Tarantino regularly shoots off at the mouth to pan the work of other directors. So I'm puzzled that people seem so outraged when other directors call Tarantino's work into question. However, now he's gone further to pan the performances of veteran actors, calling their work "inauthentic" and "simplistic." Everyone from Louis Gossett Jr to Leslie Uggams to Ben Vereen to Levar Burton to John Amos to Ed Asner to Madge Sinclair to George Stanford Brown to Moses Gunn to Maya Angelou to Cicely Tyson. Inauthentic? Or is Tarantino is mentally-disturbed?

  • Carl | February 11, 2013 2:39 PM


    FYI...Bluto is a known "must have the last word" shrew on this blog. Hot tempered and classless. She eats metal cans and hates anything that is not black and does not have a vaginia.

  • monkeysuit | February 11, 2013 2:28 PM

    As a side note, how you going to call someone a "simple negro" when they disagree with you? What kind of self-hating nonsense is that? I know the internets breeds extra-ness, but Imma need you to do better.

  • monkeysuit | February 11, 2013 2:10 PM

    LOL, I'm simple?! You can't even read! I answered you about Schindler's List here:

    "Schindler's List is universally accepted as a masterpiece. Unfortunately, there is no slavery movie of this caliber. Now if Tarantino were making a movie on a civil rights leader like let's say Marcus Garvey, and he started saying out of pocket things about the performances in Malcolm X, then I would completely understand where all of y'all are coming from. I would join you in the lynching party. But he didn't criticize Malcolm X or any other masterpiece. He criticized the ever problematic Roots. This is a non-issue."

    I would think you would be able to "think critically" and connect that what I was saying was yes, Spike Lee and anybody else would be off-based criticizing the performances in Schindler's List because it is a masterpiece. The same goes if Tarantino criticized Malcolm X. I would understand the outrage then. But against something like Roots? Nah homie.

    Come at me with something smarter, please. Otherwise sit your rude ass down and agree to disagree.

  • BlutTopaz | February 11, 2013 11:42 AM

    Because you are still shouting from the rooftops about Django being "a good film", this is "no-issue", etc and using it as a standard above Roots which you keep referring to as historically inaccurate just because you think Whites come off looking too easy. You want to ignore numerous facts about the time period and medium when Roots was broadcast, so this is all you have to go on.

    And now you can tell me where I compared Roots to Schindler's List--Diversion 101 is not your strong suit monkey, because I noticed you did not answer my rhetorical question about Spike dissing Schindler's List.

    And so far, the only bs you have noted about Roots is that it was "white-appeasing". I suppose you think Django is not, because of Jamie's sidekick character with a gun. That is the appeal to a lot of simple negroes who lack critical thinking skills, so I forgive you as well.

  • monkeysuit | February 11, 2013 9:49 AM

    Oh lord. I know reading is hard, but try to respond to things I actually said. Like when I said, "But if I have children one day, and I want to teach em a little something about slavery, Roots wouldn't be my first or last point of reference. Neither would Django, but it doesn't purport itself in this role like Roots does."

    So where in that statement did I claim Django to be historically accurate? Or that Tarantino is educating us about OUR history? I just said the man has a point about your beloved white-appeasing Roots. You see, if you had chilled the fuck out and actually read the conversation you inserted yourself into, then it would have saved you a useless paragraph or two.

    And Roots significane comes in its popularity and magnitude, not in its quality. But if you seriously think that Schindler's List and Roots deserve to be in the same conversation, then we really have nothing else to argue about.

    And the username means tuxedo, fyi. I just like the DOOM song, Monkey Suite. Funny you talk about racism, but you have no problem making racist implications at one of your own. But I forgive you.

  • BluTopaz | February 11, 2013 1:24 AM

    @ Monkey (appropriate screen name, btw): I'm already chill, but you need to remove your lips from qt's butt cheeks.

    You "didn't hear Tarantino trashing roots"? What is: "When you look at ‘Roots,’ nothing about it rings true in the storytelling, and none of the performances ring true for me either…I couldn’t get over how oversimplified they made everything about that time. It didn’t move me because it claimed to be something it wasn’t.” And in another comment he referred to Roots as "bullshit". How many times has it been said in this thread alone, that a made for tv movie in the 1970's could not show all the horrors of slavery? For a so called media professional, tarantino did not even acknowledge that very simple context. And where did you get your "history degree" from, where you believe an enslaved Black man shooting up White folks during slavery is historically accurate in comparison? Yes all the complexities of that era deserve to be told; but did you expect a network tv movie now to show fathers being forced to have sex with their female relatives for breeding purposes? Or what about more mutilation scenes-people still remember the scene where Kunta's foot was cut off all because he wanted to take charge and be the man in his family. Or maybe Kizzy being sold off from her family was too Disney-ish for you? Decades later Roots is still remembered as a cultural milestone, and deservedly so. Slavery was something no one talked about at all and it's still a touchy subject. What will Django be remembered for, besides gore, soundtrack and qt's asinine comments--and oh yeah, the oscar nominations. And what is wrong with comparing Roots to Schindler's List? They are both cultural milestones because they have resonated with audiences for decades.

    It's one thing to see a flick and enjoy it for 2 hours of mindless entertainment. Why would I care what you waste your money on, I know a few Black people who saw Django simply because of Jamie Foxx (they are the type who will see any movie with a Black star in it, it's their way of uplifting the race and that's cool). But when you flap your gums about how others need to accept being informed by an ignoramus like Tarantino about the accuracies of OUR history, and this convo is a "non-issue"; you need to slow your roll-chick. Critical thinking is one thing, blindly yassa bossing, with no acknowledgement of all the points given, is another.

  • monkeysuit | February 11, 2013 12:18 AM

    @NETS I don't know him. I just like to argue with people I think are wrong.

    Did y'all see his black man accent on 106&Park? That really was offensive. I'm surprised nobody's flippin their shit about that. They won't let me post the link but just search "Tarantino," "106 & Park," "black man accent," and you can add more fuel to the Tarantino hate.

    "Everybody wants to be a nigga, but nobody wants to be a nigga."

  • monkeysuit | February 11, 2013 12:01 AM

    @BLUTOPAZ Why don't you chill out with your judgmental ass and read what I actually said, which was "That's not to say they'd be their only sources," meaning obviously I'd make them read what I've read. I have a history degree, honey, so please take a step back. The debate is about Roots' inaccuracies, and Nets said a documentary would be better than a narrative to introduce a child to a topic. I was just responding with some narratives I would feel comfortable letting them see to teach em a little something.

    I'm a cinephile so I happen to believe that film is a powerful medium that unlike no other art has the capacity to make people FEEL something about topic. And I want my children feeling something when they're learning about fucked up shit. So yeah, I think there are a number of narratives that are adequate teaching tools along with other sources. I mean...I assume they'll be going to school. Roots ain't one of em.

    And I didn't hear Tarantino trashing Roots. I heard him saying the same shit my black film studies and history professors have said. But even if he did, to answer your question, yes. I do hear filmmakers trashing other filmmakers working in the same genre. How about Spike Lee's comments on Flags of our Fathers and Letters to Iwo Jima? Or Steve McQueen's rant against American filmmakers at the director's table last year? Matter of fact, check out this link:

    There you will find 30 of the nastiest insults hurled between filmmakers.

    And lastly, you must be kidding me comparing Schindler's List to Roots. You are so completely off-based that must've been a joke. Schindler's List is universally accepted as a masterpiece. Unfortunately, there is no slavery movie of this caliber. Now if Tarantino were making a movie on a civil rights leader like let's say Marcus Garvey, and he started saying out of pocket things about the performances in Malcolm X, then I would completely understand where all of y'all are coming from. I would join you in the lynching party. But he didn't criticize Malcolm X or any other masterpiece. He criticized the ever problematic Roots. This is a non-issue.

  • BluTopaz | February 10, 2013 1:16 PM

    Correction: tarantino apparently does not believe entire productions of Black cultural veterans deserve this modicum of respect

  • getthesenets | February 10, 2013 1:15 PM


    I sense that you are just incapable of criticizing qt for anything..and you'll find an excuse/justification for anything he says or does.

  • BluTopaz | February 10, 2013 1:06 PM

    @MONKEY: ask yourself if Spike or any other Black filmmaker, would ever be given the opportunity to make a mainstream film about the Holocaust after talking trash about Schindler's List. And you mentioned below you would have your kid watch certain films about tragic eras in our history, so they can learn. Why not have them READ slave narratives, or bring them to a Holocaust museum? Why depend on films only as a source of education? Like millions of other people, Roots was my intro to the evils of slavery and Jim Crow. But even as a child I didn't understand why the other Africans helped the Whites capture Kunta Kinte--so my mother brought me to the library and helped me try to figure that out. The problem a lot of people have with an idiot like tarantino is that there are millions of people who DON'T read at all, and will walk away from a flick like Django thinking slavery had its comic elements to it. And re: your defending him; how many other filmmakers do you hear totally trashing films that are in the same genre, with derogatory comments about the historical inaccuracies and the performances? If anything there is usually a mutual level of respect, a professional courtesy. tarantino apparently does not believe entire productions of Black cultural veterans don't deserve this modicum of respect, and he is free to do so because boot lickers like yourself (who depend on Hollywood flicks to educate them) will defend his arrogant, entitled white ass.

  • Agent | February 10, 2013 6:58 AM

    I never said because you like Django you are an ignorant asa nigga. Btw I'm commenting on Django which in fact was mentioned in this article.

  • monkeysuit | February 9, 2013 11:07 PM

    Y'all are funny. Don't football stans criticize NFL players all the time? And it's not just because I agree with him, it's because it's not an unpopular opinion, but he gets heat because y'all don't like his personality? And their are a lot of factors that go into performance. Whoopi sucked in For Colored Girls, but that doesn't make her a bad performer. There's only so much you can do with a bad script and bad directing.

    Like I said to Agent, we have to agree to disagree. I don't find Tarantino's work racially problematic. And I think he's more than proved himself as a capable, competent filmmaker. He may be arrogant, but most filmmakers at that level are. There are countless examples of them taking jabs at one another with Spike Lee leading the pack on that one.

  • getthesenets | February 9, 2013 10:51 PM


    Yeah. later in the same doc. qt himself is the topic and one of the speakers, an nytimes film critic, calls him out for some of his comments/actions.. some of the speakers criticize him..a speaker gives him props for essentially reviving interest in the genre.

    I laughed because Fred Williams had put together and financed "Original Gangsters" with Shaft,Priest,Coffy, Hammer and Slaughter in the same film before "jackie Brown" was released

    and Keenan Ivory Wayans had paid homage with a classic parody "I'm Gonna Git You Sucka" several year before that.

    I'm not naive, I understand that he brought elements of the genre back on a mainstream level....but just laughed that the speaker didn't clarify that.

    qt gets passes all day ,everyday to do and say whatever he wants ,Blu

    His comments about Parks were just entirely disrespectful. Like I said to Suit, qt is a clown....everytime he speaks they might as well play circus music.

  • BluTopaz | February 9, 2013 10:33 PM

    @ GetTheseNets: I saw that same doc and could not believe he had the nerve to criticize Gordon Parks like that. And it wasn't a critique for anyone who wants to defend him; he plainly said Parks messed up a golden opportunity because HE, Tarantino, would have showed what a bad mofo Shaft really was in the intro to the film. It was such a blatant display of arrogant white male arrogance; Spike's comments re: Django paled in comparison but of course, Tarantino was never put on blast.

  • getthesenets | February 9, 2013 10:24 PM


    qt is an asshole who just is way too comfortable saying foolish shit.

    OK...his views on the mini series mirror you don't have a problem with that.

    The four members of the cast in the clip are stage trained veteran actors *with ALL the industry accolades.....ocar,emmys,'tony..How you feel about him criticizing THEIR performances?

    Especially in light of his knowledge of Black culture being limited to 70's era Black films.Some good films made in that era but majority were plaged by low production values and mostly horrible acting.

    It's like a fan with season tickets to the arena league criticizing NFL players.

    qt is really seriously a clown and besides his penchant for using whatever words he wants..whenever he wants...also a pattern of him feeling free to criticize Black artists

    Saw a doc. on the "blaxploitation era". Very first person who spoke was qt, of course, doc. was aimed at white audiences probably.
    Later on , the topic is Shaft..and of course..qt weighs in about how Gordon Parks blew the opening scene..and how he would have done better..etc etc..

    Doc was called "Badasssss" saw it on ifc

    qt is a clown..fact that you happen to agree with him on quality of Roots doesn't take away from the fact that he is a clwon

  • monkesuit | February 9, 2013 9:47 PM


    If I wanted my child to learn something about the Holocaust, I'd show them Schindler's List or Life is Beautiful or Sophie's Choice. About slavery, I'd let them see Sankofa or even Amistad. That's not to say they'd be their only sources, but I would be comfortable with those. Not only is Roots inaccurate, but it paints a sugar-coated picture of slavery using flat characters and sometimes silly scenarios. Like I said, I like it for what it is, and I've watched it many times. It's just not very complex. And we're talking about slavery here. A time where the whole country brainwashed themselves into thinking it was moral. The topic deserves complexity.

    Look, all I'm saying is Tarantino was far from off with his remarks. You may not agree, but there are plenty of people who have been saying the same thing as him. It wasn't a smear. He was just saying America's most popular moving picture reference for slavery falls short in its storytelling. I don't see how that's offensive.

  • monkeysuit | February 9, 2013 9:30 PM

    See, that's what annoys me about this whole Django debate in the first place. If you like the movie, you're an "ignorant ass nigga." An Uncle Tom. Even if someone tried to defend Soul Plane to me, there's very little they can say to make me think their opinion of a fucking movie makes them an "ignorant ass nigga." I feel like a movie like this doesn't even deserve this much emotion expelled on it. It was good. It wasn't Tarantino's best or worse. But twenty years from now the controversy's going to be remembered more than the actual movie.

    And for the record, I'm clearly not as upset as you who will sit here and comment multiple times on a thread about a series that you haven't even seen. Like, what?

  • Agent K | February 9, 2013 9:05 PM

    So upset huh? I'll give it to you Django wasn't simple. It was a fucking mess. And just so I'm clear, it's not the movie I am upset at but it's ignorant ass niggas that attempt to convince me it's something that it is not.

  • getthesenets | February 9, 2013 8:36 PM

    @ SUIT

    I've read a few people criticize Roots.

    For a television mini series from 1977, what more do you think could have been done or shown?

    I'm not understanding some of the criticisms. and I open the question up to anybody who cares to answer.

    What is your main gripe with Roots(1977) and has any tv film or mini series since covered the topic any better?

    I would think that a documentary and not a feature film/ mini series would be best way to introduce a child, or anybody, to a topic.

    Roots broke all types of ratings records(which basically translates to "a lot of WHITE people watched it and THAT's really what gave it classic iconic status .

    I think Roots was very well done, except for the token "po' white " good guy characters inrroduced towards the end

  • monkeysuit | February 9, 2013 6:46 PM

    UGH! You never saw an episode?! Why are you defending it then?! Just stop.

    I've actually seen Roots. Many, many times, and I like it. It's entertaining. But if I have children one day, and I want to teach em a little something about slavery, Roots wouldn't be my first or last point of reference. Neither would Django, but it doesn't purport itself in this role like Roots does. That's why he mentioned Roots because it holds a position in this country as being THE slavery epic. And that's sad considering all its flaws.

    For what it is, Django is far from simple. That's where we'll agree to disagree.

  • Agent K | February 7, 2013 9:19 PM

    I know what you're talking about. To be fair I've never seen an episode of Roots so I can't speak much about that issue. But for Quentin to say Roots is simplified while Django is simplified just doesn't make sense to me.

  • monkeysuit | February 7, 2013 8:10 PM

    Oh brother. We'll have to agree to disagree on that one.

  • Agent K | February 7, 2013 7:11 PM

    Django Unchained is neither historical accuracy or artistic truth. It's exploitation.

  • monkeysuit | February 7, 2013 6:47 PM

    Uhhh yeah. Obviously it's not historically accurate and neither is Roots, but that's not what he criticized. He specifically said story-telling and performances. Artistic truth and historical accuracy are completely different things.

  • Agent K | February 7, 2013 6:20 PM

    As if Django Unchained was more authentic huh?

  • Carl | February 7, 2013 5:38 PMReply

    Tarantino continues to get the "Blacker Than Thou" group pissed! I love it!

  • Donella | February 7, 2013 4:22 PMReply

    I was disappointed to read Tarantino's ignorant, ugly, and uncalled for, and untrue comments about the performances by a multi-talented ensemble. I was even more disappointed that it took this long to confront Tarantino and call him to task. People seem so afraid of this idiot.

  • Donella | February 7, 2013 4:50 PM

    Also, Louis Gossett Jr's performing the audiobook Twelve Years a Slave. That's worth a mention on this site, isn't it?

  • Mia Mama | February 7, 2013 1:57 PMReply

    Y'all been punk'd by QT. As they say in show business, all publicity is good publicity. QT will rake in the paper and stuff his clutch.

  • Hey | February 7, 2013 5:48 PM

    Any black people you get this happy for? Not that you have to, just wondered if you ever get happy for black people getting over a bunch of people that haven't done anything to them.

  • Nadia | February 7, 2013 10:31 AMReply

    Folks are kinda missing the fact that Reginald Hudlin was sitting right next to Quentin when he said that shit about Roots. He should be getting all this heat, not Tarantino who's just getting his rocks off.

  • Agent K | February 8, 2013 6:51 AM

    I get what you're saying. Btw I meant historical porn.

  • getthesenets | February 8, 2013 12:09 AM

    @Agent K

    Just passing along his quotes.
    One of MY issues with Roots, that neither RH or QT ever spoke about having an issue with ..was the introduction of the "poor white friendly characters" in the third act...and the COMPLETELY bullshit exchange that the poor white woman had with Tom's son.

    Saw it as a kid and thought it was completely bullshit..

    Chicken George's son had just been beaten by "klan" type night riders....the poor white guy saves his life by pretending to whip him....Tom is being tended to...and his son, who saw it all...todd bridges by the way, is crying about hating white people...the poor white wman ACTUALLY says some bullshit along the lines of "I'm don't hate you?Hate them for what they did..not because they are white"

    I mean in the scene..his dads BACK was still split open and the white character is feeding him THIS bullshit????

    I thought Roots was great. did think the token "good white characters" were not necessary...

    I've heard people express RH's point about the non climactic ending being somewhat of a copout though.

    I've never read Roots myself , so don't know whether the po' white characters were in the book or just adadded for the tv version..

  • Agent K | February 7, 2013 11:55 PM

    The whole whipping thing should let people know that this is not to be taken seriously as if slavery was reduced to just whippings. Historical lorn at best.

  • getthesenets | February 7, 2013 11:13 PM

    @Agent K

    Here is what I found. Quote from Q&A with Ebony magazine summer 2012

    Reggie Hudlin "when Quentin and I talk about movies, we saw the same movies. We both talked about our experiences watching Roots when we were a kid. You know the end of Roots where the white slave master’s tied to the post and the black man has the whip and then he goes, ‘Oh, I can’t beat you. That would lower me to your level’ …? I was a kid in East St. Louis, watching that screaming at the TV, ‘Oh, hell no!!!’ I have never seen John Wayne go, ‘Oh no, I can’t do that.’ John Wayne handles his business at the end of every movie. But somehow when the black man is at the end of the movie, the rules are different. And the fact is Quentin was in South Bay, California, screaming the same thing, having the same reaction! So for us, we have a black man beat a white slave master with his own whip, which, as far as I know, has never happened in the history of cinema. It’s like, Wow, we’re doing our jobs."

  • getthesenets | February 7, 2013 10:29 PM

    @ Agent K

    He might have said he agreed with QT. Gonna look into it.
    I think he should have been clear in distancing himself from QT's comments though. He should be smart enough to know that his silence about those comments does constitute him co-signing them to some extent.
    I will dig, and I will be disappointed if I read him verbally cosigning quentin on this.

  • Agent K | February 7, 2013 6:38 PM

    @Getthesenets I could be wrong but I swear I saw something where he agreed with Quentin.

  • getthesenets | February 7, 2013 5:27 PM

    @Nadia and @ Agent K

    History will judge Reggie Hudlin and the Black press/media for their actions or inaction regarding everything related to this film.

    QT made the comments though and he is the one rightfully being discussed.

    RH, unless I missed it, doesn't agree with QT. Unless you're considering his silence to indicate his agreement. Like I said, history will judge him for that.

    I never heard him come out and disrespect the mini series or it's actors. I've read hm say that Spartacus and Fred Williamson film(tlofnc) were the "slave films" that he enjoyed, and he gave his reasons.

  • Agent K | February 7, 2013 1:57 PM

    Reggie actually agreed with Tarantino.

  • jewellthief | February 7, 2013 7:37 AMReply

    they've been puttin him on blast and rightfully so...WW got lucky for all intents and

  • YK | February 7, 2013 1:28 AMReply

    I'm torn. On the one hand I applaude anyone willing to correct QT's ridiculous comments...on the other, Wendy was pining for some kind of trash talking for the segment and got it--weak rebuttals at that. How did WW get on TV in the first place?

  • David Motsamayi | February 6, 2013 11:14 PMReply

    The controversies around "Django" are boring. The film is clearly a send-up. S&A is clearly fishing for controversy with this post.

  • starry118 | February 6, 2013 11:52 PM

    ... and I guess since you stated that, it must be true.

  • Ava | February 6, 2013 7:06 PMReply

    Tarantino's remarks about Roots being 'inauthentic' reminds me of the same entitled Caucasian American kids who used to make those 'know it all' comments (usually just for the sake of hearing their own voices) while sitting in on an Introductory to the Black Experience class in college. Unfortunately for them (and fortunately for those of us who were subjected to their blathering), the Black professor would usually give them a good ole fashion 'dressing down' which in a few instances concluded in aforementioned entitled Caucasian American kid being reduced to tears. I'd love to broach his statements to one of those professors and see what their responses would be.

  • Troy | February 7, 2013 5:57 PM

    I liked the movie however QT has never surprised me with any of his movies. Once you realize he is a typical twisted caucasian and not a elitist jewish writer channeling Woody Allen. We could leave the event at the movies but that would mean they would less social impact than a viral video that gets spread around and talked about by millions of people.

  • jewellthief | February 7, 2013 7:38 AM

    I had a AA studies teacher just like that....

  • dami | February 7, 2013 6:31 AM

    Curious to know if you saw the film. If so, how did it compare to your expectations before watching it?

  • Monique a Williams | February 6, 2013 6:55 PMReply

    This interview was great, the Django piece wasn't even necessary. I would have rather heard more about their time making the film.

  • kiki | February 6, 2013 6:09 PMReply

    Django was a comedy. Had no idea. Quentin has become a know-it-all about our history. How odd.

  • Kyac86 | February 6, 2013 3:51 PMReply

    What some may be missing is this- for a white man to say that a
    Black narrative written by a black man about His family is the outside of enough
    I have no beef with Tarantino. I enjoy his artistry as a storyteller but that does not mean
    He he aint getting a Strong side eye for thinking what he said he is not only true but ok. Why as black people some of us are so quick to defend wrong I don't understand. All in the name of steering clear of race. Race matter and that's the way it is. Just because I see color and love my people does not mean I'm incapable of appreciating others. It just means I won't tolerate the ish that came out of Tarantino mouth. And the brother who defends him.

  • CareyCarey | February 6, 2013 3:10 PMReply

    The best uncle tom the movies have ever see, Stephen played by Samuel Jackson said: "What that nigga doin' on that nag?!"

    Now Stephen, this here is my guest, Django and Dr. Schultz. They're here for business. Why don't you go prepare two bedrooms for Django and Dr. Schultz, Steven.

    "You gonna let that nigga sleep in the big house, monsieur?"

    Yes, Calvin hissed, don't ask so many damn questions. You will do as you are told.

    "We gonna burn the sheets and mattress after he leave?"

    It's my business whether we burn the sheets and mattress after he's gone, understand?

    Yessum boss man, dis is yo house and I's is so sorry.

    Now enters the old version of Calvin's Candyland's Lil'chillin', Kizzy, Kunta Kinte, Chicken George, Fiddler and Toby (Leslie Uggams, LaVar B., Ben V. Louis Gossett Jr, and John Amos). They're all back skinnin' and grinnin', shuckin' & Jivin', saying everything their masters wants them to.

    Come on now, they may not be facing a hangin' from the nearest oak tree, or forty lashes from a bloody whip, but you better believe they all know what side their bread is butter on. So although what Quentin said is true, it does not surprise me that these Root soldiers have turned into the 3 monkeys; Hear no evil, see not evil and speak no evil. NO NO NO, dem negro's desires is to keep sleeping in the big house. There is no way in hell they'll talk bad about their boss man or Roots. BETTA NOT!

  • Agent K | February 7, 2013 7:42 PM

    I appreciate the response and I understand where you're coming from but I just see Django Unchained as just an exploitative, blood-n-gore Western comedy to me. Nothing more nothing less. From what I remember he championed this film as a slavery film. But my irritation stems from those who champion this film as something it is not. Again this is just my pov.

  • CareyCarey | February 7, 2013 7:14 PM

    Agent K, but the difference is QT never represented his movie as something it was not. So, lets look at his quote one more time... "It didn't move me because it claimed to be something it wasn't."

    Now, how his indifference with the film any different than black folks who were not "moved" by the movie? Persoanally, I believe his remarks are being blown waaaaaay out of proportion. As Monkey Suit said "Historians have been criticizing Roots since it first premiered." But wait, they were probably black historians so it's all good. *wink*

  • Agent K | February 7, 2013 2:02 PM

    This is just me but when your film is just as oversimplified you really can't say much. If he had just said it didn't move him I would understand.

  • CareyCarey | February 7, 2013 9:04 AM

    *and a hush fell over the audience* *lol*

    Yeah TAZ, how could anyone argue against that? I mean, when I look at Tarantino's statement, it's hard to understand why anyone would say it's not true.

    If one takes the time to actually look at the mini-series, there's no doubt that it oversimplified the institution of slavery during that time period. Also, it's important to note that the author of the book (Roots), Alex Haley was busted out for... shall we say, plagiarism. So Tarantino's assertion that it didn't move him, and it claimed to be something it wasn't, is very valid. I mean, knowing what we know about the real horrors of slavery and Alex Haley's "background", I challenge anyone to present a compelling argument.

    And please, I'm with Nebbylite... anyone who's remotely thinking about channeling the old hucklebuck's (cast) foolish notion that since Quentin is not black he can't have an opinion on slavery, can miss me with that unadulterated B***Sh**.

  • TAZ | February 6, 2013 11:06 PM

    *drops the mic* Exits stage right.

  • NebbyLite | February 6, 2013 3:03 PMReply

    "We're on our side of the street, he can be on his side." Sounds like cinematic segregation to me.

    I hate seeing people blow gaskets over Django simply because QT is white and writing a movie about slavery where black people call each other the N word.

    Why can't he do that? Because he's white? Saying you can't write and create a character and scenario based on something you don't have any personal experience with is ignorant. So I can never write a TV episode about a serial killer because I have no experience murdering someone? I can't write about women issues because I'm not a woman. Can a black director not direct a movie with a cast of all white people? Absolute NO on all accounts.

    The cast of Roots who say QT can't do this because he has no personal black history is missing the point entirely. It's fiction. He's a writer. Putting a limit and rules for a writer to write about is creative injustice. As a writer he put himself in each character's shoes and YES "Django" is much more authentic, less melodramatic, and more personal than "Roots." Ten fold. No question about it.

    I don't think anyone is pretending "Django" is 100% realistic. It's not meant to be. It's obvious. But there are true moments of emotion and humanity that ring true for everyone to connect with. Slavery is treated with respect, horror, and passion. As it should be. But it's leveled out with moments of ridiculousness and strangeness. Most of that comes from how ridiculous the white slave owners appear to be and how they act. When you think about it, that makes sense. As a modern audience, the only way we can understand why a man would own slaves is that he's insane by today's standard. QT knows that and plays on the eloquently.

    All the haters saying Django is damaging because of all the N words need to do a reality check. Do you actually think there weren't that many N words thrown aroudn at that time? I'm sure black people heard that all the time, considering white people would always refer to them as that.

  • Agent K | February 7, 2013 2:07 PM

    I don't know if you saw the movie but that shit was not about slavery. Besides being freed by his "King", that's about it. Slavery is pretty much like a background of a painting. I just think people are giving Django more credit than what it really is.

  • NEBBYLITE | February 6, 2013 3:24 PM


    First off, I don't appreciate your nasty and offensive comment to me. It just sheds light on your type of personality and frankly, it's not looking too good.

    Yes QT criticized the series Roots and the actor's performances. And yes the cast was reacting to that. But they went beyond that. They were calling him out because he doesn't have any personal history being black. As if QT can't make an educated critique of a tv series simply because he didn't live through slavery. Is QT not allowed to have an opinion on the quality of Schindler's List because he's not Jewish? I'm not saying QT is a historian, but the man is entitled to his own opinion no matter what his ancestry is. Telling him that he can be on his side of the street while the encompassing black people will be on the other side is cinematic segregation. Plain and simple. If anything the Roots cast didn't address QT's comments very well. They went after him as if QT doesn't know what he's talking about. Do they know him personally? Yes QT attacked them, but he's entitled to his opinion and of course he's goign to think his film is more authentic to how slavery looked in the South. QT's an ego maniac.

  • getthesenets | February 6, 2013 3:11 PM


    Try addressing what the topic is about.qt criticized the mini series Roots and the performances. The four assembled members of that cast...responded to his comments and voiced their opinions of his film.

    One thing for certain, though. if anything ever happens to qt..they can just scrape your tongue and throat and clone him

Follow Shadow and Act

Email Updates

Most "Liked"

  • 'Take Me To The River' Celebrates Memphis' ...
  • Byron Hurt Seeks Hazing Victims, Perpetrators, ...
  • Carra Patterson and Paul Giamatti will ...
  • Trailer for 'Contamination' - Film Tackles ...
  • VH1 Announces the New Cast of 'Love ...
  • Check Out the First Teaser-Trailer for ...
  • Papa Pope, Crazy Eyes and Egyptian Revolutionaries ...
  • Weekend B.O. Aug. 15-17 (The Dog Days ...
  • "Bang, Bang!" HBO Releases New Trailer ...
  • Energetic First Trailer for Kenya-Set ...