Troll

https://youtu.be/RB4rI-_52fk

Example

Ok, I read a bunch of you're criticisms in other comments. You call it copaganda in some and then complain about not being able to relate to the police officer characters in other posts. I think (and I'm not saying this to be mean) you are either a troll or have abysmal media literacy. Jimmy is a scumbag. He has major flaws. Many come from his inability to cope with the things he does and also he's a selfish asshole. But also, Jimmy is good police. Take politics out of it. Just on a level of catching murderers, he's good. It's the only thing he's good at, and sometimes he's scummy to do it. On you're problems with the show being copaganda. I don't know, I have pretty left leaning political views and I feel like the wire falls more into just a story about complex people. Sometimes they do the right thing sometimes they don't, that's part of what's interesting in a story. If everyone did the right good thing the show would be fucking boring. Also I might suggest you think about the themes. The wire is a pretty hard critique on capitalism and the drug war. I would argue that it's pretty hard on the police who are outright targeting the barksdale drug organization while politicians involved all skate free in harmed. The real scammers through the show are the contractors and businessman who are stringing stringer bell along to funnel more money out of him into their pockets. All legal.

Do you understand what drama is? Are those not things that make him compelling to watch.

If his goal is to get out of dodge, than YES! You would leave no witnesses.

Dude, his goal is to save his wife from what again? From being a slave. Django was unchained from what again? Being a slave. Did he accomplish his goal directly or indirectly?

No, you're the one arguing about direct action. The thread is "is Django an abolitionist" you're twisting the argument again and again to fit you're belief. Can I ask you this.

When the movie is done is Django's wife free? She is still property. He just killed her owners but someone else would just claim ownership. All of those slaves Django doesn't free but let's go peacefully; why? Their witnesses to his crime of murder and theft. If his goal is ONLY to save his wife and get out of doge as you claim, then why leave witnesses? Why let himself be known?

Using Brian mills from taken is such a disingenuous connection. Did Brian mills grow up as a human trafficking victim? Did he spend 30+ years being brutally abused in every way a human can be, only to have the chance to confront one of him and his wife's abusers? You're acting as if slavery doesn't play into the story about slaves killing their masters. If slavery had nothing to do with the story then why set the story in the south, during slavery, from a slaves perspective?

Maybe you're right. I'm stupid and you're smart. You understand film themes and I watch pretty colors.

Lmao, does Django have to stop murdering white supremacists to look at the camera and say "slavery is wrong. I'm going to end it with a gun". You're a fucking clown for trying to assert that Django is completely fine with slavery. Anything you say to imply this is just proof you're arguing in bad faith. Do you just not want one of the themes of the movie to be slavery is bad? Are you bending over this far backwards to make this argument for some other reason?

Cope

Did he kill Calvin Candie? Directly? Did he burn down the plantation? Directly? Can people have primary goals and secondary goals too? Can you set out to do one thing have just happen to get to accomplish a second unseen goal? Did Django set out to end slavery all together? No of course not, but when the opportunity to end it for a few appeared in front of him... As everyone has stated before it's a revenge movie about a guy trying to save his wife... And get revenge. What's the thing he's trying to to get revenge for? Oh that's right, the whole slavery thing.

Bro, how does it feel to say the correct answer but immediately contradict yourself and say it's wrong?