Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Zarguthian OP t1_j6jjgco wrote

Reply to comment by Dottsterisk in I just watched Django Unchained and am a bit unclear on a few details, please help me out. by Zarguthian

>Why were they armed? I don’t remember if Schulz was conspicuously armed. Django probably would not have given up his gun.

After Stephen informed Monsieur Candie of the deception both their pistols were taken from their clearly visible belt holsters.

>And are you really confused that Django would call Stephen “the lowest of the low,” for having an important role on a brutal slaving plantation?

Yes, the fact that he's important means he isn't low at all! He seems to be running the whole house like a modern day butler or housekeeper would with a team of servants.

−6

Dottsterisk t1_j6jjrdq wrote

Then is your question only about Schulz’ hidden gun?

Do you know what it means to call someone “the lowest of the low”?

3

Zarguthian OP t1_j6jklxj wrote

>Then is your question only about Schulz’ hidden gun?

Calvin Candie: Mr. Moguy, would you be so kind as to collect the pistol hanging off these buys' hips here?

If they were hidden how could Candie know they had them? No one had drawn any guns yet except for the guy with the shotgun behind them.

>Do you know what it means to call someone “the lowest of the low”?

Maybe not, I thought it meant bottom rung on the hierarchy.

−2

Dottsterisk t1_j6jluz4 wrote

I have no idea what you’re asking, regarding the guns. They were armed because they’re bounty hunters traveling across dangerous country. They were disarmed when Candie discovered their deception. Schulz had a hidden gun and used it. Where’s the confusion?

And calling someone the lowest of the low is a moral judgment and not at all a statement about their place in a professional hierarchy.

1

Zarguthian OP t1_j6jn8wu wrote

>I have no idea what you’re asking, regarding the guns. They were armed because they’re bounty hunters traveling across dangerous country. They were disarmed when Candie discovered their deception. Schulz had a hidden gun and used it. Where’s the confusion?

Maybe it's a product of the time, it just seems odd to not disarm yourself or be asked to do so and be refused entry if not when entering certain places, like your host's premises. The only people I woudl expect to have weapons on them in this situation would be Candie's security team/guards.

>And calling someone the lowest of the low is a moral judgment and not at all a statement about their place in a professional hierarchy.

I understand that bit now.

1

ryan30z t1_j6m0blu wrote

It's a hidden gun, the whole point of a hidden gun is that it's hidden.

If you have a hidden gun you're not going to go "oh also here is my hidden gun".

2

nola_mike t1_j6jkakh wrote

When he refers to Stephen as the "lowest of the low" he isn't talking about his importance at Candyland. He's talking about him as a person specifically the fact that Stephen does everything he can in order to keep black people enslaved and ensure he has the absolute easiest life he can as a black man in the South during that time period.

He's essentially calling Stephen the biggest piece of shit out of the entire pile of shit.

3

Zarguthian OP t1_j6jl17z wrote

Ah, right, yeah I agree with that. Now that you mention it I think it was said that a black slave trader (Django's role) was called lowest of the low too.

1