I once wrote a rather lengthy analysis of this movie. The idea was to mirror the story of the movie with the story Schultz tells Django about Broomhilde and Segfried. Anyway, this scene you mention was particularly important because it shows the "Dragon" is actually SLJ's character. Right after Candie is shot you everything is in slow motion; SLJ turns and you can actually hear an animal roar sound (which I think is the Dragon). SLJ is actually the brains behind Candies business -- he's the one that figured everything out. As a further aside, after Django gets revenge, SLJ's character, who had been walking with a cane, drops his cane, stands up straight, and walks without a limp -- as though he is showing his "true form". It's an awesome scene, as you said.
@@stoopidpants Yes. Love that too. The act put on by his character as this kind old man with a cane, this perfect slave, was all BS. Dude was just working the system for his own benefit, small as it was in that system.
I think the scene where SLJ and Leo are both sitting comfortably in the ante room sipping brandy confirmed that they were both ‘partners’ on a more equal footing than the public saw. SLJ knew perfectly how to control the slaves and ward off danger and Leo was just the front. It was a glorious scene indeed
@@dayoolaleye1265 Loved that, but still a full partner wouldn't have to put up an act unless he was doing it for the benefit of the others around Candie, keeping up appearances and such.
We can all thank Sam Jackson for Leo's amazing performance. During the first day of shooting, Leo went to Jackson for advice, telling him he didn't know if he could do some of it, and that it was "pretty tough". Jackson told him he HAD to go "that far" and even further, and if Leo didn't take it to the extreme, he'd be doing a disservice to history etc. So the next day, Foxx saw Leo come in and waved at him saying hello. Leo reportedly ignored him and wouldn't even make eye contact with him (or any black person on set for that matter, with the sole exception of Jackson who was playing his 'house n***a'). Foxx went over to Jackson and asked what was up with Leo and if he was alright. Jackson just replied "He's not gonna talk to you. He's "in it" now"
What I found most interesting about Candie is that he isn't Django's villain. That title goes to Stephen. Calvin Candie, although mainly seen interacting with Django, is Dr.Schultz's villain. Everything that Schultz is, Calvin is the opposite: Schultz is well-mannered, travelled and both empathetic and humble despite his profession Whereas Calvin is crude, maintains a facade of being a well-educated man when in reality he is wholy ignorant and an absolute monster to almost anyone that challenges his ego
@@MrHousecup I mean, I personally don’t really see it. He definitely has an ugly manipulative side more or less, I mean, he is sort in participating on an uncivilized system such as slavery even though in his own country that is already a banned barbaric practice; all for the sake of his mission and interests, he uses what is there on the platter for him, but at the same time acknowledges it and such. He isn’t loved by every character, his best relationship with Django was that of uncertain friendship in the end, and every other character either feels jealous or hates him.
@@newguy8288 I'm sorry, I don't mean to be insulting. But a Marty Stu is the male version of a Mary Sue, which is a character who is perfect in nearly everything and almost never fails. Or whatever character flaws he or she has is actually charming or amusing. Another example of this could be Rei from the Star Wars sequel trilogy.
@@MrHousecup he's not really a Gary Stu tho. If it wasn't for Django he would have blown their cover when Candie was belittling D'artagnan and the whole final act of the movie happens the way it does because Schultz killed Candie , even tho it was literally the stupidest possible choice at the time since all he had to do was shake his hand and they would have been scot free
Fun fact: Stephen was the one who raised Calvin, not his actual dad. So that means Calvin’s love of mandingo fighting, racism, and all his bad qualities was because Stephen raised him to be that way.
So that means Stephen is even more racist than Calvin? A self-hating Black man is well-suited to making his fellow slaves suffer, to please his masters. Oddly enough, it still goes on today.
9:56 "Of course, Calvin finds out that Jango in fact isn't all that he pretends to be" The most ironic thing is: Calvin didn't find out. His slave Stephen found out and told him.
This! And the way he goes about confirming his suspicion was so great! First, he picks up on Calvin's sister's remark that Hilde only has eyes for Django, after which he pressures Hilde on wether or not she knows Django, which she basically confirms by the way she was behaving, and lastly he eliminates all remaining doubt by manipulating Candi into treating Hilde in such a way it was bound to get a reaction out of Django. Ironic, how in spite of Candi's belief in white superiority, the by far most intelligent person on Candiland was a black man.
@@CommanderLex It just goes to show that intelligence isn't measured by how much you know, but rather how you can apply whatever kind of knowledge you gain to solve a problem.
I'd argue that Stephen, and not Candie, is _the_ main villain. He survived three white owners with his calculating intelligence, he is totally amoral, and has a razor sharp sense of self preservation and advancement, with the genius, overall, to make Candie believe that Candie is doing his own will, and not Stephen's. And, he does die last, as any main villain should.
I think the film works so well (in part) because it shows how many people are complicit in creating a place like Candieland--often many of the victims themselves, like Stephen. Personally I cheered the hardest when Candie's sister got plugged. Tarantino said everyone always laughs at that bit.
It helps that Candie clearly sees Stephen as a father figure. Compare the relationship that Calvin has with Stephen to the way he talks about his daddy the one time he bothers to bring him up vs how he interacts with Stephen and it's clear who he he really holds as a father figure and it's not his daddy. I dont think he would admit it aloud even to Stephen. But Stephen knows.
I sort of agree, and always have felt Stephen as like when the animals look into the windows in the book 'Animal Farm' and see the pigs dressing, drinking, and acting like humans. Stephen acts submissive when in view of others with Calvin, but when it was Stephen and Candie together, he looked very confident and informative about Django's true intentions.
@@fuferito I think it's interesting that when Stephen speaks with Calvin about Schultz and Django in private he speaks to him not as master and slave but very much as equals. In public Stephen was the picture of deference but in private the lines were completely blurred and it looked, at least to me like Stephen was the one really in charge.
I'd love for you to do Stephen as well. It's so fitting that Stephen is the final villain of the movie, because he represents all the venal, selfish, amoral aspects that Django is set in opposition to. Like Django he is playacting at being something else than what he is (intelligent) but he uses his intelligence only to help his master inflict further cruelties upon his fellow slaves, so he can improve his own lot at their expense. Samuel L. Jackson described Stephen as the most vile black man in the history of cinema.
@@edwardgaines6561 well some did I couldn’t give you a percentage but it was definitely a thing however I don’t know if Stephen would indulge in it seems to me he was just using slavery as a way to keep himself at the top if he was free i doubt he’d run the risk as he is well aware of how smart most slaves were unlike Calvin
A part of me was sad for Stephen cz he made himself a POS just to survive, even if that meant he got no love from the other enslaved. Complete survival mode, as deep as it gets.
The first thing that struck me about Candie was his cruelty. The second was his charm and charisma, which I'm surprised you didn't talk about more. There's a likeability to him that's magnetic, albeit superficial. He dresses like a dapper gentleman, his movements are elegant almost feminine and he can appear extremely courteous and obliging. This goes into what you were saying about covering up his inferiorities and despicableness but this is what sticks in my memory, the charm and evilness existing hand in hand - that's what I find fascinating about this particular villain.
It’s DiCaprio that you’re seeing, not Candie…Candie has no redeemable qualities, but the charm and charisma that makes DiCaprio such a magnetic presence bleeds through on screen.
@@hahajones It's Candy: He displays "superficial charm," a hallmark trait of sociopaths. They study how to manipulate people, and practice until they know exactly what to say and how to act to make you lower your guard and like them. They flatter, flirt, feign interest in you, and make you feel interesting and smart and wanted. They are so "likeable" because they know how to speed run gaining someone's trust.
@@hahajones that's no different then saying every character in every show or movie ever is just their actor. DiCaprio is playing Candie and thus in those moments is Candie. If he wasnt supposed to play the character that way he wouldn't have. While he's a great actor to claim the character doesn't have those traits just because the actor is playing him is ludicrous and downright dumb
I would love to see an Analyzing Evil : Gustavo Fring from Breaking Bad. He’s a very interesting villain and I’d love to hear this channels take on him and his actions
That Candie admires French culture is ironic, because his name is French and Mississippi was part of Louisiana. Calvin is French but also Protestsnt and a surname, so it represents an effort by his parents to distance themselves from their French ancestors(who may also be Creoles).
And i think it was completely intentional of tarantino, the idea is that the guy is submisive like a dog. jackson, if the movie requires it, can have a VERY intense acting range.
@@torvamessorem6686 ahh yes the subservient will-lacking house slave is just like his character in the hateful eight or pulp fiction, both of which are strong and experienced. He does yell in a lot of his roles but to say he’s the same every movie is just stupid.
@@Dan-ud8hz Wasn't he an illegal escapee from Maryland? Then the North was harboring a criminal, which amounts to conspiracy and treason. Just yanking your bling. Douglass was a great orator. But the slave/master paradox is about the same as the landlord/tenant one. Believe me, I know.
The charm and charisma that he brings to good guys but with a villain instead is seriously captivating. A vile piece of shit but damn if he doesn't hold your interest.
Homelander as a character would be interesting, because he seems so emotionally unstable that a good analysis could go into a lot of things about his background and environment.
Homelander is basically like Titan from Megamind. Both received their superpowers due to a scientific chemical and both feel like they deserve love and attention just because they're powerful enough to get away with anything they want.
It never fails to blow my mind when I remember there was a time in history (and probably even still in today's world) that people genuinely thought that other races weren't even human.
There's also the fact that everything he and his cronies did were 100% absolutely legal. And what Schultz and Django did by killing all of them was illegal but it had to be done.
that's why it's the wild west. Actions back then were poorly dictated by law to the point that the local government was the highest of the town due to poor modes of communications. Killing the sheriff and knocking out communication is far easier then, than it is now.
I remember hearing about that, yeah! You actually see him examine his hand as the scene winds down a bit and I think he wraps it with some spare cloth on set.
@@enqrbit A lot of the people in the Nazi party were, especially within the SA and SS. Which is more evil I’ll let the commentators decide. The Nazi? Or the man who piggybacks off them
The most "evil" characters, are not those who exert the most observably evil traits, but those who mask it behind something you can understand. Been waiting for this one, because this character is just **chefs kiss**
You’ve always shown talent from the get-go, but I am genuinely impressed with how far your writing has come. As others have pointed out, you’ve really started to channel a Rod Serling-style eloquence and fascination with these characters without ever forgetting who they are and what they represent. Great work man
In my opinion, the actor that played D'Artagnan, brief though his part was, gave one of the best performances in the film. He portrayed perfectly everything his character was feeling almost without saying a word. The look of servility, of defeat, acceptance of his fate, whilst also showing how petrified he was with mostly facial expressions and body language was just superb.
When an actor performs so well at their skill, that you completely forget the actor entirely. Throughout the movie, I completely forgot this was Leonardo DiCaprio. All I saw was Calvin Candie. As a black man, I was both surprised and uncomfortable with how impressed I was at this performance 🎭 👏
I see a lot of comments on here taking note at how evil Steven was in the movie. Django makes a comment before we meet Candie about a black slaver being lower than the head house slave, which is pretty low. This statement foreshadows that we can expect a Steven-like slave to be evil. How evil? I think the audience expected Monsieur Candie to be evil but I don't think the audience, or even Django himself, were ready for just how evil Steven was in this movie. He was so evil, he actually accentuated Monsieur Candie's own evilness, as he acted out in his master's apparent best interests. But this was always to benefit himself.
Of course. There’s a million reasons. That’s the whole horror of it, there was nothing any slave could have done. The entire establishment was designed to stop them at any point of their rebellion
@@thedumbdog1964 Exactly, we all think we would have taken action back then, now that we know it was wrong. The truth is we wouldn't have done shit either, just like Old Ben.
The best part is when Ben’s nephew finds Ben’s secret rice dish recipes and he began to make and master them. Then, once he perfected his uncle Ben’s rice recipes, Stephen caught on to it. So Stephen hit Ben’s nephew upside the head with a stick and then tossed him down the n!gga hole. Then Stephen picked up the recipe book and said, “Uncle Ben my ass.” and then threw the recipe papers in the garbage. Legend has it however, that ole Ben had another nephew and THAT nephew dug his uncle Ben’s rice recipe papers out of the garbage where Stephen had thrown them. Legend also has it that same nephew of Ben’s, took those rice recipe papers and turned them into a rice company that grew and thrived. I can’t remember the name of the company, but I hear it did very well. 🍻
One interesting aspect about Candie’s appearance and the Candyland plantation sets was that they took inspiration from Satan and Hell itself as the set designer saw Candie as a Devil-like figure when he read the script. If you notice all the interior shots of Candyland are varying degrees of red with dozens of candles to represent the Devil’s domain. Very suitable for a villain that puts on an air of fake charm and dealing in atrocities regarding the fates of humans under his servitude.
What I love about Candie is that his design tells you everything you need to know about him. Handsome, charming, rich, but then you see those teeth and it all comes together; this man is rotten inside. Everything else may be pretty, but under the surface is nothing but festering ugliness.
Most people had bad teeth in the 1800s. It's hilarious that none of the slaves in the movie had bad teeth, considering how they probably weren't even given toothbrushes, ate terrible foods, and never went to a dentist.
@JakeKoenig No, slaves used certain tree barks and fashioned brushes for themselves to clean their teeth and the "horrible foods" they ate were the scraps of animals like innards which are actually good for you. I actually have photos and written accounts of former slaves in my family for the details.
@@JakeKoenigSugar is what rots teeth- Slaves wouldn't have had access to it. Peoples' teeth could be crooked or blackened due to smoking, but slaves wouldn't have had access to sweets like that.
He mastered the southern accent in this movie. His character was a hypocrite. Unfortunately southern culture of this time in history groomed him to be who he was. It is both satirical and shameful
I always thought that Stephen was the brains behind the operation and Calvin was just the dumb face of the organization. They both needed each other. Calvin obviously looked up to Stephen as a wise elder figure, but would have him play the wacky butler role most of the time just for appearance.
@Black Boy King TV Stephen was a slave, I agree, but I still think he had more control than one would assume at first. When only Django is in the room with him, he reveals his limp to be fake, which I always saw as his way to convince his owner, that he wasn't a threat. And it seems to work, Candie trusts him unconditionally. Literally the first scene we see Stephen in, he fills out a check in Candie's name. So while Stephen is a slave, I'm pretty sure, he's still playing a role. I'm just not convinced that Candie knows of this
@Black Boy King TV I mean yeah of course he was a slave; but Stephen was, for all intents and purposes, well off on top of the suffering backs of his own kin. He basically raised Candie, was like a father figure to him, got a prestigious position, specially for slave, where he could basically run the entire business on his own; Stephen was more close to being a slaver than a slave
Agreed... Stephen was definitely the brains, and this point is shown when Stephen sits in Calvin's chair in the office and pours himself a drink and proceeded to tell Calvin to thank him for figuring out the plot. Calvin was oblivious to the plot and only knew of it because of Stephen.
@@horsepower523 Exactly. His 'evil' is in his perfect adaptation to a given path. Him being (kinda) at peace with doing awful stuff for awful people. But Vincent the grey = super evil, while thugs and gangsters from the 'hood' = victims of sOciETy...
@@MrBen51309 There is no such thing as a benevolent slave owner. That's already a strange oxymoron (I think that's the word for it, or am I thinking of misnomer?) It'd be like saying gentle rapist or friendly serial killer. Yeah they can act nice but they're still doing something fucking abhorrent.
One of DiCaprio's best performances. Fun fact: That scene where his hand is bleeding... was real blood. DiCaprio accidentally hit his hand on a wine glass as he slammed his hand onto the table. However, he didn't break character the entire time. Tarantino was even shocked at what he saw but kept filming. The blood on the hand added more to the character's insanity.
@@worldofdoom995 Hope she didn't suffer some trauma from that experience, or think of DiCaprio as some sort of psychopath outside of his role. Though I bet as soon as Tarantino yelled cut, DiCaprio broke character and screamed out loud in pain.
I read in some interview somewhere about Calvin's fascination with phrenology. By the time the events of Django Unchained takes place the entire pseudo-science of phrenology had been largely debunked by the scientific community, which further implies that Calvin is not only wilfully malicious in his approach to knowledge but also ultimately ignorant in science.
@@pagodebregaeforro2803 Exactly what I was gonna say: there are so many idiots in America right now who refuse to accept their entire worldview has been factually debunked... they'll cling to those beliefs _because_ they seemingly back up the person's sick, twisted view of the world.
@@Wastelander1972 Bill the Butcher’s “Nativist” ideaology isn’t what makes him a villain at all. For me it’s difficult to consider him a anything more than a typical old man being left behind in an ever changing world. He starts off as a Villian, but you come to admire him halfway through the movie. His death is not a triumph of good vs evil. But merely a passing of wisdom from one age to another with an ending of an era. What makes him scary is the “butcher” part. And his lack of empathy for humanity, being nothing different than what you’d find hanging on a meat hook. Without this, He’s basically just Clint Eastwood in Grand Torino
@@Wastelander1972 I think it's more than being born American. His family fought in the revolution. So he thinks anyone not connected to the founding of the country isn't really American.
I must say as someone who loves every one of these videos, how greatly appreciative it is that most of your villains you analyze are never the obvious pop culture choices. Every video I scroll through I see people wanting to see Joker, or Walter White, or some other character we've seen that are popular and analyzed and talked about a million times already. It's nice that each choice is a great pick and one I'm not expecting nor have seen anyone analyze before. Excellent work!
Please do an Analysing Evil for Stephen. He's an incredibly interesting Villain, easily the most intelligent person on the plantation playing the role of a jovial house slave while subtly manipulating everything from behind the scenes, causing everyone to greatly underestimate what he is truly capable of. The only person to see anything close to his true self is Django, which I find interesting for many many reasons. The scene where he speaks to Candie about Broomhilda gave me chills the first time I watched it, seeing him switch completely behind closed doors
Recently learned that DiCaprio had to pause during one of the scenes because he was so uncomfortable with the number of N bombs he was dropping to which Samuel L Jackson quipped "Motherfucker, this is just another Tuesday for us."
@@DawoudKringle but to be honest for his time period he was actually pretty smart basically everybody in the south was racist at the time but the thing is most southern didn't owned slaves it was only the elites so he was definitely way smarter than a average southern at that time period the racism was basically normalized because what he was doing was considered legal so can you really say he was stupid or just a product of his time even the north that hated slavery was pretty racist they just didn't believe blacks should be enslaved but they still felt that they were superior to us
Absolutely murder. Murder isn't an unjustified killing, but an illegal one. And killing this scum would have been illegal back then, even if morally right.
i never viewed Calvin Candie as anything more than a cartoon character with just how vile and insane he was, loved what DiCaprio did with his performance, but its interesting to see and hear that he may actually have some layers to him
Oh man it’s 4:57am and I just finished watching this movie and I came straight to these videos! Django Unchained is easily among my top favorite movies ever!
Like most psychopaths, Calvin is a great actor _ I don't mean Leo Di Caprio. Psychopaths can not understand feelings of empathy or even pity but pretend to very well. He also exhibits love for himself vicariously through others like his sister or even Stephen. Thanks so much for the outstanding video!
The way I see Stephen is that he's one of those weasel characters (the kiss ass) but knows how to fool the person in charge, leading them rather than being lead. Kind of like a dog on a leash but is the one pulling and leading the owner to the park. He fooled everyone about needing a cane and his demeanor changes when the situation called for it, like when he figured out about Django wanting to save Broomhilda while Calvin was oblivious - even pointing out Calvin's ignorance to his face without ever receiving punishment for it. It does bring up a logical question: Who was really in charge? Calvin or Stephen? He's also willing to sacrifice other slaves if it means he gets to live a better life compared to them. All he had to do was act the fool when in fact he was the one pulling the strings. As for why he disliked Django, I think it's because of jealousy. He wasn't negative towards him for being a black slaver. He was sour because Django was a freeman, which Stephen wasn't despite his position on the plantation.
Man it's sad when people either try to be edgy and say that slavery and racism is "based" for attention or they're actually just racists who think slavery really is "based"
I really do hate how entertaining candy is. I mean I get it’s DiCaprio but hes just so entertaining for how despicable hes characterised to be in the movie.
Please analyze Tony Montana from the film “Scarface” Always wanted to hear your perspective on the character’s ideals, motives, morals, & ultimately what made & drove him to his self demise. Very interesting villain no doubt he was evil but felt that he was better than the other murdering drug lords who surrounded him. He had an issue with following a direct order that he knew would cost him his own life because it would of resulted in the killing a woman & child. He was also overly protective of his sister & felt the need to protect her from an evil world that he help make even more evil resulting to him killing his best and only real friend because he was going to marry sister which only drove his poor sister insane a straight looney nut case. Tony was toxic and either would eventually kill you or drive those close to him insane.
@@maratonlegendelenemirei3352 - No he wasn’t evil at all, just killed a dude for a favor. Sold cocaine to the masses and destroyed countless lives, treated his wife like dirt, killed unarmed people, he was more of a Mr. Rogers type character.
@@maratonlegendelenemirei3352 Just watched it about a month ago & he gave very weird vibes off to his sister where she honestly thought he wanted her sexually at the end which was creepy, lol. But in the restaurant he admits of being the bad guy & embraces it. Also from the same point of view one can say Hannibal Dr Lector wasn’t evil either because he also loved children going as far as punishing a serial child predator right? Gave him a popper making him cut his face up. He also befriended & saved Clarice’s life more than once. Considering he’s saved more life & was more culturally aware than Tony Dr Lector is far from evil yet he’s been analyzed. Darth Vader is also not evil for the same reasons when only seeing he’s good traits & ignoring the lives they took. Nice try though buddy, lol
@@downfromthereeefters His wife was a lazy good for nothing bum. I think Tony did way too much for her as a husband. Tony imported coke but he didn't hold no gun to someones head saying "hey, buy this shit or else"
@@saintbabylon7250 That restaurant scene was full of diners who were all crooks. Tony called them out on their bullshit. “Behind every great fortune there is a crime.”
The moments where he is being all charming and making jokes, would trick you into thinking he had some sort of human side to him. But then the scenes where he is sending his dogs to eat someone else alive or forcing 2 men to fight to the death wake you up from that thought. As well as him just being so nonchalant about it.
Leonardo DiCaprio actually cut his hand in the dinner scene when he smashed the skull. Calvin Candy also exhibited a sense that he probably was attracted to his widowed sister. He was no surprise, in my opinion. The fact that he becomes curious about Django suggests that he had a glimpse into the future after meeting and interacting with Django and he dreaded it. Django proved to Calvin that he wasn’t simple minded or a coward. On a side note, Calvin Candy’s man Steven may have been like a loyal dog, but Steven was just as bad if not a lot worse than Calvin Candy.
They really went for accuracy with those fake teeth inserts, that DiCaprio wore for this film. I didn’t even notice them until the third time that I watched this film!! YUCK‼️🤢. Tobacco stained, discolored, and crooked.....totally gross!!
To add to the "their skulls are smaller and thus cause deficiencies in mental capability" viewpoint, there have been a multitude of cases of people losing LARGE portions of their brain matter, and returning back to normalcy after some time of "brain rewiring". I remember seeing a video of a man who lost almost 50% of his brain matter, and has a large dent in his head, and after 2 years he was back to full capacity again. Yeah, minor differences in skull shape do not indicate intelligence capability.
Can you analyze Al Pacino "Tony Montana" I feel that his character played with everyone's emotions. We go from cheering him on to slowly hating what he has become.
Tony's downfall started when he refused blow up the car that had children inside. because Tony had morals and values.... Kinda. Even though he was a bad man, he refuses to kill children so I perceive Tony Montana as a good man.
Yep! That’s real at first. The scene cut out, our boy LD went and got stitches, then they went back and finished the scene with fake blood. Although it didn’t occur on camera, there’s a similar story with out other buddy Brad in Seven.
I believe when Leonardo slammed his hand on the table he cut himself on the glass in the process. Yet, he stayed in character making the scene even more believable. 🥃🤚🏥🚑
Yes if you notice when he slams his hand you hear the glass break, he hollered in pain because of it. Then later he is seen picking glass from his hand. Lastly he rubs his real blood on Kerry Washingtons face. Amazing how they all stayed in character but you can tell from their faces that was real.
@@SP-lt5kd He does not rub his real blood on her face. They did several takes and liked the one where he accidentally cut his hand so much that they did another take with fake blood so he could then rub it on her face.
In a death planet as the one in madmax. Inmortan joe is in fact a good guy. Without his brutality, the people at the bottom would used all the water and food in no time, leaving the place in worse shape than Joe’s administration
@@USAads2023 That's a rather insane theory! Do you believe that one individual is capable of administering the ressources, regardless of human loss(!?) - and that people in general aren't to be trusted with their own ressources..? Of course immortan Joe is the bad guy - there's no arguing, unless you're applauding totalitarism.
What's very ironic about Candie's love of the French culture as "being sophisticated" is that every violent and ruthless treatment by Candie to his slaves, the French slaveholders did even worse when they owned Saint-Domingue. The scene with the dogs tearing the old slave apart is directly inspired from the infamous "Rochambeau's Dogs" in the last moments of the French occupation of Saint-Domingue, when Rochambeau had imported slavehunting dogs from Cuba and "tested" them on slave prisoners as a form of twisted entertainment.
If you're interested in tackling someone who is utterly reprehensible and irredeemable, consider an analysis of the title character of _Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer_ (and you could even throw in a mini-analysis of his sidekick Otis as a bonus!).
@@Galantski intersting contrast between Henry and Otis. One was a purpose driven psychopath with his own ethical code rooted in an aversion to sex and attachment, while the other was simply an opportunistic, predatory sociopath with nothing but hedonistic pleasure as his guide. They were bound to fall out, and did over Otis' sister. I thought the ending was surprising, but in retrospect, Henry stayed true to form.
@@shanefelkel9966 Yeah, and that ending? Just brutal,. Even though we see nothing but Henry leaving the suitcase at the side of the road in the morning, we know he's leaving alone after spending the night with Otis's sister. Poor Becky, but she should have better sense than to a) visit Otis, and b) fall in love with Henry, who told her (ala the Joker) different versions of how he killed his mother : Stabbed her, clubbed her with a baseball bat, and/or shot her in the head.
@@shanefelkel9966 And you know the big irony? Henry ends up killing Otis after he catches him trying to have sex with Becky ("Don't do that Otis, she's your sister!"), then ends up killing Becky himself after presumably having sex with her.
I'd love to see an Analyzing Evil on Johan Liebert from Monster. That series is exceptional and unfortunately horrifically underappreciated and I'd love it if more attention were payed to it, especially since there's so much to Johan that you could dissect
Heck Id have gone with roberto tbh. Hes fascinating. Hes so much more brutish than johan but equally intelligent and ultimately emotionally deadened by the program he was subject to. Its a shame he never met Grimmer face to face it might have awakened something in him like when Johan fainted after reading the book
@@TheLordexilius Considering he ruins a guy's life out of a creepy obsession, he kind of counts. I'd say he's a tragic villain in the sense that he's mentally sick and desperate for some kind of human connection, which fuels his dangerous actions. Kind of like Leatherface in that both of them do horrible things, but are so mentally warped, you question if they even realize what they're actually doing.
i do'nt think Carrey's CableGuy can be considered to be featured in these series? I mean by the end he was no hero,but then again can he be placed between Cannibal Lecter,Darth Sidious, John Doe etc?
On my first viewing it was fairly obvious that Calvin had a fascination with his sister and was either having a incestuous relationship, or wanted to. Watched it again recently and after it was mentioned she was widowed it occurred to me Calvin probably had her husband murdered, or had "accidental " death arranged, out of jealousy. Any others that came to that conclusions or have seen it mentioned before?
I would love to see you analyze evil in the Tolkien/Lord of the Rings universe. There are a lot of differing "styles" of evil in that universe, much more than just Sauron and Saruman.
@@carldrogo9492 Usually you'd be right, but in this case you can find deeper motivations. Sauron desires to dominate all life for the sake of eternal peace and order, for example. Most probably due to Tolkien's books being closer to mythology than normal fairytails
@@carldrogo9492 No, the most nuanced villains with the deepest backgrounds I've ever seen were all entirely fictional. But that's just my experience personally.
Willard from “Willard” would make a great subject for this series. Either the 1970s original or the 90s version with Crispin Glover. Loving this channel
As much as good actor Leo is, I don't think he could have pulled off that facial switch from inviting and mannered to ice cold as Waltz did in the opening scene.
it's funny to me because Dr Schultz is generally humble and patient but when faced with what basically is a fedora lord with way too much money he just CAN'T take it and cannot resist the urge to sneak in the little Derringer shot at the best moment
![[#2024MAMA] BIGBANG (빅뱅) - 뱅뱅뱅 (BANG BANG BANG) + FANTASTIC BABY | Mnet 241123 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EQsYfiPR9uM/mqdefault.jpg)
The scene were he dies is brilliant. Dr. Schultz getting him with the hidden gun and apologizing to Django that he just couldn't stand Candie anymore.
I once wrote a rather lengthy analysis of this movie. The idea was to mirror the story of the movie with the story Schultz tells Django about Broomhilde and Segfried. Anyway, this scene you mention was particularly important because it shows the "Dragon" is actually SLJ's character. Right after Candie is shot you everything is in slow motion; SLJ turns and you can actually hear an animal roar sound (which I think is the Dragon). SLJ is actually the brains behind Candies business -- he's the one that figured everything out. As a further aside, after Django gets revenge, SLJ's character, who had been walking with a cane, drops his cane, stands up straight, and walks without a limp -- as though he is showing his "true form".
It's an awesome scene, as you said.
@@stoopidpants Yes. Love that too. The act put on by his character as this kind old man with a cane, this perfect slave, was all BS. Dude was just working the system for his own benefit, small as it was in that system.
@@stoopidpants 9p
I think the scene where SLJ and Leo are both sitting comfortably in the ante room sipping brandy confirmed that they were both ‘partners’ on a more equal footing than the public saw. SLJ knew perfectly how to control the slaves and ward off danger and Leo was just the front. It was a glorious scene indeed
@@dayoolaleye1265 Loved that, but still a full partner wouldn't have to put up an act unless he was doing it for the benefit of the others around Candie, keeping up appearances and such.
We can all thank Sam Jackson for Leo's amazing performance. During the first day of shooting, Leo went to Jackson for advice, telling him he didn't know if he could do some of it, and that it was "pretty tough".
Jackson told him he HAD to go "that far" and even further, and if Leo didn't take it to the extreme, he'd be doing a disservice to history etc.
So the next day, Foxx saw Leo come in and waved at him saying hello. Leo reportedly ignored him and wouldn't even make eye contact with him (or any black person on set for that matter, with the sole exception of Jackson who was playing his 'house n***a'). Foxx went over to Jackson and asked what was up with Leo and if he was alright. Jackson just replied "He's not gonna talk to you. He's "in it" now"
Damn!!!!
Sam Jackson redpills Leo
n word
Jackson gave him the n'word pass
As The Vile Eye said, “All of Calvins actions are… based…”
What I found most interesting about Candie is that he isn't Django's villain. That title goes to Stephen.
Calvin Candie, although mainly seen interacting with Django, is Dr.Schultz's villain.
Everything that Schultz is, Calvin is the opposite:
Schultz is well-mannered, travelled and both empathetic and humble despite his profession
Whereas Calvin is crude, maintains a facade of being a well-educated man when in reality he is wholy ignorant and an absolute monster to almost anyone that challenges his ego
One criticism I'd have of Schultz is that he's kind of a Marty Stu.
@@MrHousecup I mean, I personally don’t really see it. He definitely has an ugly manipulative side more or less, I mean, he is sort in participating on an uncivilized system such as slavery even though in his own country that is already a banned barbaric practice; all for the sake of his mission and interests, he uses what is there on the platter for him, but at the same time acknowledges it and such. He isn’t loved by every character, his best relationship with Django was that of uncertain friendship in the end, and every other character either feels jealous or hates him.
@@newguy8288 I'm sorry, I don't mean to be insulting. But a Marty Stu is the male version of a Mary Sue, which is a character who is perfect in nearly everything and almost never fails. Or whatever character flaws he or she has is actually charming or amusing. Another example of this could be Rei from the Star Wars sequel trilogy.
@@MrHousecup he's not really a Gary Stu tho. If it wasn't for Django he would have blown their cover when Candie was belittling D'artagnan and the whole final act of the movie happens the way it does because Schultz killed Candie , even tho it was literally the stupidest possible choice at the time since all he had to do was shake his hand and they would have been scot free
@@MrHousecup If he was a "marty sue" he would have somehow survived that massive gunfight without a scratch neither surrender.
Fun fact: Stephen was the one who raised Calvin, not his actual dad. So that means Calvin’s love of mandingo fighting, racism, and all his bad qualities was because Stephen raised him to be that way.
Fun "fact", though?
So that means Stephen is even more racist than Calvin? A self-hating Black man is well-suited to making his fellow slaves suffer, to please his masters.
Oddly enough, it still goes on today.
“Fun” fact, though?
@@shinkenger2011 Yes Protoman, it is indeed fun.
Societal norms and personal interests can be just as influential if not more than who raised you.
9:56 "Of course, Calvin finds out that Jango in fact isn't all that he pretends to be" The most ironic thing is: Calvin didn't find out. His slave Stephen found out and told him.
This! And the way he goes about confirming his suspicion was so great! First, he picks up on Calvin's sister's remark that Hilde only has eyes for Django, after which he pressures Hilde on wether or not she knows Django, which she basically confirms by the way she was behaving, and lastly he eliminates all remaining doubt by manipulating Candi into treating Hilde in such a way it was bound to get a reaction out of Django.
Ironic, how in spite of Candi's belief in white superiority, the by far most intelligent person on Candiland was a black man.
@@CommanderLex THIS!
That’s not ironic.
well that's how he found out
@@CommanderLex It just goes to show that intelligence isn't measured by how much you know, but rather how you can apply whatever kind of knowledge you gain to solve a problem.
That "A man as rotten as his teeth" remark is the best summary of his character in the shortest words.
@Peterson Peterson Grow up.
good take considering how they didn't bother to makeup dicaprio's teeth for more realism.
@@Ndasuunye I think Leo’s teeth are that jacked up? Come on now
💯
@@imcallingjapan2178 👴🏾
I'd argue that Stephen, and not Candie, is _the_ main villain.
He survived three white owners with his calculating intelligence, he is totally amoral, and has a razor sharp sense of self preservation and advancement, with the genius, overall, to make Candie believe that Candie is doing his own will, and not Stephen's.
And, he does die last, as any main villain should.
I think the film works so well (in part) because it shows how many people are complicit in creating a place like Candieland--often many of the victims themselves, like Stephen. Personally I cheered the hardest when Candie's sister got plugged. Tarantino said everyone always laughs at that bit.
It helps that Candie clearly sees Stephen as a father figure. Compare the relationship that Calvin has with Stephen to the way he talks about his daddy the one time he bothers to bring him up vs how he interacts with Stephen and it's clear who he he really holds as a father figure and it's not his daddy. I dont think he would admit it aloud even to Stephen. But Stephen knows.
I sort of agree, and always have felt Stephen as like when the animals look into the windows in the book 'Animal Farm' and see the pigs dressing, drinking, and acting like humans. Stephen acts submissive when in view of others with Calvin, but when it was Stephen and Candie together, he looked very confident and informative about Django's true intentions.
@@healmeat,
In the intimacy of Calvin's office, between the two of them, it is Stephen in the power position.
@@fuferito I think it's interesting that when Stephen speaks with Calvin about Schultz and Django in private he speaks to him not as master and slave but very much as equals.
In public Stephen was the picture of deference but in private the lines were completely blurred and it looked, at least to me like Stephen was the one really in charge.
I'd love for you to do Stephen as well. It's so fitting that Stephen is the final villain of the movie, because he represents all the venal, selfish, amoral aspects that Django is set in opposition to. Like Django he is playacting at being something else than what he is (intelligent) but he uses his intelligence only to help his master inflict further cruelties upon his fellow slaves, so he can improve his own lot at their expense. Samuel L. Jackson described Stephen as the most vile black man in the history of cinema.
Yep Candie was Schultz rival while Stephen was Django's
Kinda makes you wonder. If Blacks could own slaves themselves back then, would Stephen have had his own plantation?
@@edwardgaines6561 well some did I couldn’t give you a percentage but it was definitely a thing however I don’t know if Stephen would indulge in it seems to me he was just using slavery as a way to keep himself at the top if he was free i doubt he’d run the risk as he is well aware of how smart most slaves were unlike Calvin
A part of me was sad for Stephen cz he made himself a POS just to survive, even if that meant he got no love from the other enslaved. Complete survival mode, as deep as it gets.
@@banchan7546 that is a lie none did
The first thing that struck me about Candie was his cruelty. The second was his charm and charisma, which I'm surprised you didn't talk about more. There's a likeability to him that's magnetic, albeit superficial. He dresses like a dapper gentleman, his movements are elegant almost feminine and he can appear extremely courteous and obliging. This goes into what you were saying about covering up his inferiorities and despicableness but this is what sticks in my memory, the charm and evilness existing hand in hand - that's what I find fascinating about this particular villain.
It’s DiCaprio that you’re seeing, not Candie…Candie has no redeemable qualities, but the charm and charisma that makes DiCaprio such a magnetic presence bleeds through on screen.
@@hahajones Or maybe Candie has a fake veneer of charm
@@hahajones It's Candy: He displays "superficial charm," a hallmark trait of sociopaths. They study how to manipulate people, and practice until they know exactly what to say and how to act to make you lower your guard and like them. They flatter, flirt, feign interest in you, and make you feel interesting and smart and wanted. They are so "likeable" because they know how to speed run gaining someone's trust.
@@hahajones Yes, because sociopaths never use charisma to get their way.....
@@hahajones that's no different then saying every character in every show or movie ever is just their actor. DiCaprio is playing Candie and thus in those moments is Candie. If he wasnt supposed to play the character that way he wouldn't have. While he's a great actor to claim the character doesn't have those traits just because the actor is playing him is ludicrous and downright dumb
I'm just mad DiCaprio didn't get the oscar for this role, he was so spot on
Absolutely
Leonardo NoOscaro
He was unlucky enough to be across the table from Christoph Waltz.
I don’t think the Academy wanted him to get his first in a supporting role. They’re more like wrestling bookers than art critics. Can’t stand ‘em!
Hollywood didn't have the guts to honor the performances of either Leo or Jackson. Both characters were far too provocative.
I would love to see an Analyzing Evil : Gustavo Fring from Breaking Bad. He’s a very interesting villain and I’d love to hear this channels take on him and his actions
Agree^^^
I wouldn't call gustavo evil at all. He's literally just a business man in a tyrannical country that bans drugs, which should all be legal
@@AverageAlien Gus is absolutely evil.
@@AverageAlien did you see what he did to Victor?
@@AverageAlien so you would‘nt call someone Evil who cuts a throat without a second thought ?
That Candie admires French culture is ironic, because his name is French and Mississippi was part of Louisiana. Calvin is French but also Protestsnt and a surname, so it represents an effort by his parents to distance themselves from their French ancestors(who may also be Creoles).
Yes, or Cajun.
cajuns
:)) let's imagine things about a fictional character, shall we? :))
this whole channel is imagining things about fictional characters if you don’t like it don’t watch.
@@marivsimperator3604Everything alright?
Samuel Jacksons performance goes under the radar in this movie.
Eh, he just does what he always does, like Jeff Goldblum.
And i think it was completely intentional of tarantino, the idea is that the guy is submisive like a dog. jackson, if the movie requires it, can have a VERY intense acting range.
What is it that he always does? SLJ doesn't do the same character twice at any point of his career.
@@torvamessorem6686 ahh yes the subservient will-lacking house slave is just like his character in the hateful eight or pulp fiction, both of which are strong and experienced. He does yell in a lot of his roles but to say he’s the same every movie is just stupid.
Man,my jaw was on the floor when I saw Stephen (SLJ). That was the most despicable character next to Decaprio's Candie.
“No man can put a chain about the ankle of his fellow man without at last finding the other end fastened about his own neck.”
― Frederick Douglass
Amen, Frederick Douglass, Haym Salomon, Chief Joseph, fathered a Nation that promptly forgot they were there 🇺🇸
According to which end of the chain you are on, is to how true that is. Sounds like armchair or Monday morning quarterbacking to me.
@@shanefelkel9966 Then you should actually read Frederick Douglass's autobiography.
@@Dan-ud8hz Wasn't he an illegal escapee from Maryland? Then the North was harboring a criminal, which amounts to conspiracy and treason. Just yanking your bling. Douglass was a great orator. But the slave/master paradox is about the same as the landlord/tenant one. Believe me, I know.
@@shanefelkel9966 It's your personal choice to stay ignorant and to receive the lack of respect that comes with that choice.
Leonardo dicaprio and Tom Cruise should play more villain roles.
Just watch that Tom cruise scientology interview that the cult memoryholed and see how he is a real life villain
I second this. I don’t know why they don’t.
@@Louzahsol I was just going to says Cruise just needs to play as his true real personality!!!
I would love to see Leo try his hand at the Joker.
@@zakkmylde1712 He already looked in this movie more like “V” for Vindetta, without a mask!
Leo really NEEDS to play more villains he absolutely killed it with this role
Seriously love him as a bad guy. So convincing
The charm and charisma that he brings to good guys but with a villain instead is seriously captivating. A vile piece of shit but damn if he doesn't hold your interest.
Yeah. He played this villain role so well.
Homelander as a character would be interesting, because he seems so emotionally unstable that a good analysis could go into a lot of things about his background and environment.
I most definitely agree
I think it would be better to wait until the series ends, because the comic book counterpart is kinda shallow
@@williamdavidm.l6665
The comic book version is absolutely nothing compared to the show. I'm so glad they changed it.
YESSSSS
Homelander is basically like Titan from Megamind. Both received their superpowers due to a scientific chemical and both feel like they deserve love and attention just because they're powerful enough to get away with anything they want.
A Conversation with Calvin Candie and Hans Landa would have something to see.
i feel like candie isn't that smart
Landa would toy with Candie like he's a child
No Schultz and landa would be better
Hans Landa would dominate that exchange
@@codyjames1054 Landa compares Jews and Nazis to being rats and eagles respectively. He's definitely still racist
I would like to see an analysis of Michael Corleone from The Godfather.
Analysis*
@@HaydenLau. hell yeah bro
Frank Booth would be badass
Nah do Luca instead
Agreed
It never fails to blow my mind when I remember there was a time in history (and probably even still in today's world) that people genuinely thought that other races weren't even human.
It's still that way
In reality they never genuinely believed that. They knew that it was wrong, which is why they used the bible and phrenology to justify their actions.
The Catholic church had deliberations on whether or not Native Americans were actually humans when the first Europeans reached the Americas
So, 2022? Because that belief persists to this day, unfortunately. That's what bigotry is based on.
@@blueshorts8820 Phrenology was the “science” of the time, as laughable as it appears today
I'd be interested in seeing you circling back to There Will be Blood and analyzing Eli.
Eli was a weirdo lol
He already did one for that movie, here: th-cam.com/video/dC0m7bXX6Yg/w-d-xo.html
What do I have to do with anything?
@@elidasilva5558 Well played, sir.
Just go watch it, it already exists.
There's also the fact that everything he and his cronies did were 100% absolutely legal. And what Schultz and Django did by killing all of them was illegal but it had to be done.
The most horrible things in the world aren't always illegal.
that's why it's the wild west. Actions back then were poorly dictated by law to the point that the local government was the highest of the town due to poor modes of communications. Killing the sheriff and knocking out communication is far easier then, than it is now.
Technically Calvin was harboring fugitives in the brittle brothers he was in the way of the law.
@@kellenwheeler9302 The Brittle brothers were in a different farm, not Candyland.
@@Ndasuunye that was the south. The west was more lawless
He actually cut his hand in a scene accidentally and kept going and it was such a good take he didn’t want to stop
When he smashed the wine glass. Yeah, that was epic.
He also smeared blood on that lady's face, if I remember right.
@@bonefetcherbrimley7740 your not wrong it actually made the scene a lot more dramatic and real
@@bonefetcherbrimley7740 Bingo, he did indeed. Leo was channeling some major shit in that scene.
I remember hearing about that, yeah! You actually see him examine his hand as the scene winds down a bit and I think he wraps it with some spare cloth on set.
This is the only one of Quentin Tarantino's villains that Quentin actually hates
not even Nazis?
hans landa??
@@reytheplatypus we just learned something fucked about old QT
@@mohammedalblooshi1822 Hans Landa wasn't really a nazi, ideologically speaking. He was more of an opportunist.
@@enqrbit A lot of the people in the Nazi party were, especially within the SA and SS. Which is more evil I’ll let the commentators decide. The Nazi? Or the man who piggybacks off them
"Gentle men, you had my curiosity. Now?
You have my attention."
The most "evil" characters, are not those who exert the most observably evil traits, but those who mask it behind something you can understand.
Been waiting for this one, because this character is just **chefs kiss**
Ayyye that chefs kiss was fire lol
As a chef I compilment you sir
You’ve always shown talent from the get-go, but I am genuinely impressed with how far your writing has come. As others have pointed out, you’ve really started to channel a Rod Serling-style eloquence and fascination with these characters without ever forgetting who they are and what they represent. Great work man
In my opinion, the actor that played D'Artagnan, brief though his part was, gave one of the best performances in the film. He portrayed perfectly everything his character was feeling almost without saying a word. The look of servility, of defeat, acceptance of his fate, whilst also showing how petrified he was with mostly facial expressions and body language was just superb.
When an actor performs so well at their skill, that you completely forget the actor entirely. Throughout the movie, I completely forgot this was Leonardo DiCaprio. All I saw was Calvin Candie. As a black man, I was both surprised and uncomfortable with how impressed I was at this performance 🎭 👏
I think an important part of this movie is the uncomfortable feelings you get imo
I had this exact same reaction to Samuel Jackson's Stephen. He brilliantly nailed that role.
@@tomgjgj Yes!! Absolutely. The worst kind of traitor to your own people. And yet, I was still intrigued and captivated by them both.
There's nothing captivating about any of these characters. They are common and mundane. Most people have a facade.
@@machida58 Well, no one is forcing you to watch or subscribe. I am entitled to my opinion as you are yours.
I see a lot of comments on here taking note at how evil Steven was in the movie. Django makes a comment before we meet Candie about a black slaver being lower than the head house slave, which is pretty low. This statement foreshadows that we can expect a Steven-like slave to be evil. How evil? I think the audience expected Monsieur Candie to be evil but I don't think the audience, or even Django himself, were ready for just how evil Steven was in this movie. He was so evil, he actually accentuated Monsieur Candie's own evilness, as he acted out in his master's apparent best interests. But this was always to benefit himself.
I say it's equally low. The only difference is perceived betrayal, as though race amounts to allegiance to anything physical or philosophical.
I always got the impression that Old Ben didn’t kill his master out of fear for his family’s life, not his own.
Of course. There’s a million reasons. That’s the whole horror of it, there was nothing any slave could have done. The entire establishment was designed to stop them at any point of their rebellion
@@thedumbdog1964 Exactly, we all think we would have taken action back then, now that we know it was wrong. The truth is we wouldn't have done shit either, just like Old Ben.
@@criminalscum_514 I would’ve took some action probably would’ve died for it but 🤷🏾♂️
The best part is when Ben’s nephew finds Ben’s secret rice dish recipes and he began to make and master them. Then, once he perfected his uncle Ben’s rice recipes, Stephen caught on to it. So Stephen hit Ben’s nephew upside the head with a stick and then tossed him down the n!gga hole. Then Stephen picked up the recipe book and said, “Uncle Ben my ass.” and then threw the recipe papers in the garbage.
Legend has it however, that ole Ben had another nephew and THAT nephew dug his uncle Ben’s rice recipe papers out of the garbage where Stephen had thrown them. Legend also has it that same nephew of Ben’s, took those rice recipe papers and turned them into a rice company that grew and thrived.
I can’t remember the name of the company, but I hear it did very well. 🍻
@@breezywriter6572 I think that rice company is called uncle bens
One interesting aspect about Candie’s appearance and the Candyland plantation sets was that they took inspiration from Satan and Hell itself as the set designer saw Candie as a Devil-like figure when he read the script. If you notice all the interior shots of Candyland are varying degrees of red with dozens of candles to represent the Devil’s domain. Very suitable for a villain that puts on an air of fake charm and dealing in atrocities regarding the fates of humans under his servitude.
What I love about Candie is that his design tells you everything you need to know about him. Handsome, charming, rich, but then you see those teeth and it all comes together; this man is rotten inside. Everything else may be pretty, but under the surface is nothing but festering ugliness.
He’s a Southern version of Ratigan from The Great Mouse Detective in that regard. Refined on the outside, monstrous on the inside.
Most people had bad teeth in the 1800s. It's hilarious that none of the slaves in the movie had bad teeth, considering how they probably weren't even given toothbrushes, ate terrible foods, and never went to a dentist.
@JakeKoenig No, slaves used certain tree barks and fashioned brushes for themselves to clean their teeth and the "horrible foods" they ate were the scraps of animals like innards which are actually good for you.
I actually have photos and written accounts of former slaves in my family for the details.
@@JakeKoenigSugar is what rots teeth- Slaves wouldn't have had access to it.
Peoples' teeth could be crooked or blackened due to smoking, but slaves wouldn't have had access to sweets like that.
Last time I was this early Candieland's big house was still in one piece.
And you could hear Stephen screaming from getting kneecapped
damn I didn't know it was in one of the arcs of the manga.
He mastered the southern accent in this movie. His character was a hypocrite. Unfortunately southern culture of this time in history groomed him to be who he was. It is both satirical and shameful
No its really based on a real guy who went around the world showing a fake skull with the supposed three dots of submission.
The north was racist too. The biggest slave plantation is in mount Vernon New York
@@enviedeveryday2835 "Other people did it too" is a poor excuse for people being so aweful
@@sceligator no im saying whites were racist whether in the north or south
@@enviedeveryday2835 Jewish people aren't white.
You can't deny that Leo is a great actor. Calvin only showed up near the ending half of the movie, but he is pretty memorable.
The ending half is like 90 minutes lmao
I always thought that Stephen was the brains behind the operation and Calvin was just the dumb face of the organization. They both needed each other. Calvin obviously looked up to Stephen as a wise elder figure, but would have him play the wacky butler role most of the time just for appearance.
@Black Boy King TV Stephen was a slave, I agree, but I still think he had more control than one would assume at first. When only Django is in the room with him, he reveals his limp to be fake, which I always saw as his way to convince his owner, that he wasn't a threat. And it seems to work, Candie trusts him unconditionally. Literally the first scene we see Stephen in, he fills out a check in Candie's name. So while Stephen is a slave, I'm pretty sure, he's still playing a role. I'm just not convinced that Candie knows of this
@Black Boy King TV I mean yeah of course he was a slave; but Stephen was, for all intents and purposes, well off on top of the suffering backs of his own kin. He basically raised Candie, was like a father figure to him, got a prestigious position, specially for slave, where he could basically run the entire business on his own; Stephen was more close to being a slaver than a slave
Agreed... Stephen was definitely the brains, and this point is shown when Stephen sits in Calvin's chair in the office and pours himself a drink and proceeded to tell Calvin to thank him for figuring out the plot. Calvin was oblivious to the plot and only knew of it because of Stephen.
@Black Boy King TV well about time they get over it. Ridiculous if you ask me. Blacks aren’t the only ones to be slaves or conquered.
@Black Boy King TV Bullshit not 400 years. Slavery only lasted 200 years. Slavery isn't affecting anyone today in America black or white.
Do an analysis of Vincent from the movie “Collateral”.
This one has my vote 100%
I don't think there's much to analyze there. Vincent is just a consummate professional doing his job with no personal emotions involved.
@@horsepower523 Exactly. His 'evil' is in his perfect adaptation to a given path. Him being (kinda) at peace with doing awful stuff for awful people.
But Vincent the grey = super evil, while thugs and gangsters from the 'hood' = victims of sOciETy...
Dude I'm right there with you, also I'm pushing for Norman Stansfield from Leon as well!
YES!
Frank Costello from the Departed? I think that could be a fascinating character study
Were you not in the fucking cahh
Hell yes
Yessss him or Colin
I absolutely love the way you assessed this without pedestalizing him or softening the deafening blow of racism and slavery. Expertly done.
@Pez funny how you can have a lot more empathy for the slave owner than the slave.
That's because Candie has no redeeming qualities. A more benevolent slave owner would've been covered differently.
@@MrBen51309 There is no such thing as a benevolent slave owner. That's already a strange oxymoron (I think that's the word for it, or am I thinking of misnomer?)
It'd be like saying gentle rapist or friendly serial killer. Yeah they can act nice but they're still doing something fucking abhorrent.
@@seventeenseventythirteen7465 he said more benevolent
@@seventeenseventythirteen7465 as in more redeeming qualities
One of DiCaprio's best performances. Fun fact: That scene where his hand is bleeding... was real blood. DiCaprio accidentally hit his hand on a wine glass as he slammed his hand onto the table. However, he didn't break character the entire time. Tarantino was even shocked at what he saw but kept filming. The blood on the hand added more to the character's insanity.
You said it all here.
Yes, Kerry Washingtons horrified reaction was actually more genuine due to that take. so it was kept in the film.
Every single man woman and child in the known multiiverse knows this fact.
@@Wheres_the_money_lebowski Not everyone. What you mean is that YOU and the people YOU know know about this fact. It's not common knowledge.
@@worldofdoom995 Hope she didn't suffer some trauma from that experience, or think of DiCaprio as some sort of psychopath outside of his role. Though I bet as soon as Tarantino yelled cut, DiCaprio broke character and screamed out loud in pain.
I read in some interview somewhere about Calvin's fascination with phrenology. By the time the events of Django Unchained takes place the entire pseudo-science of phrenology had been largely debunked by the scientific community, which further implies that Calvin is not only wilfully malicious in his approach to knowledge but also ultimately ignorant in science.
Phrenology was actually fairly widely believed by not just regular people but certain scientists as recently as the early 20th century.
@@522op41 Im not surprised, a lot of ppl here in Brazil are afraid(and not taking) of the vaccine and listening to our president negacionist bullshit.
@@pagodebregaeforro2803 Exactly what I was gonna say: there are so many idiots in America right now who refuse to accept their entire worldview has been factually debunked... they'll cling to those beliefs _because_ they seemingly back up the person's sick, twisted view of the world.
@@Jimmy1982Playlists at least Trump got out..
I hope better days to this troubled world, it seems theres another Cold War coming or something.
@@LilithsCosmicLounge it really depends on what exactly you’re disagreeing with and why.
Personally Django never gets old for me. Such a masterpiece 👌🏾
Nice Boondocks pfp 😁
You explained Calvin like you work at a museum or as a college professor. Considered me subscribed
the "hello everyone" voice sync with Calvin's mouth at the beginning of the video, that was just perfect
He was actually said "You will?" answering Dr. King Schultz when he said he would pay for D'artagnan, but cool nonetheless
Would you do "Bill The Butcher" from "Gangs of New York"?
Keep up the great content! I subbed today
I would LOVE to see that one. His superiority over being “born American” would be an incredible topic.
@@Wastelander1972 Bill the Butcher’s “Nativist” ideaology isn’t what makes him a villain at all. For me it’s difficult to consider him a anything more than a typical old man being left behind in an ever changing world. He starts off as a Villian, but you come to admire him halfway through the movie. His death is not a triumph of good vs evil. But merely a passing of wisdom from one age to another with an ending of an era.
What makes him scary is the “butcher” part. And his lack of empathy for humanity, being nothing different than what you’d find hanging on a meat hook. Without this, He’s basically just Clint Eastwood in Grand Torino
that is an underrated gem imho
@@Wastelander1972 I think it's more than being born American. His family fought in the revolution. So he thinks anyone not connected to the founding of the country isn't really American.
I must say as someone who loves every one of these videos, how greatly appreciative it is that most of your villains you analyze are never the obvious pop culture choices. Every video I scroll through I see people wanting to see Joker, or Walter White, or some other character we've seen that are popular and analyzed and talked about a million times already. It's nice that each choice is a great pick and one I'm not expecting nor have seen anyone analyze before. Excellent work!
Kinda funny. The next characters he made videos about after this one were Joker and Walter White.
He did Walter White but I agree.
Please do an Analysing Evil for Stephen. He's an incredibly interesting Villain, easily the most intelligent person on the plantation playing the role of a jovial house slave while subtly manipulating everything from behind the scenes, causing everyone to greatly underestimate what he is truly capable of. The only person to see anything close to his true self is Django, which I find interesting for many many reasons. The scene where he speaks to Candie about Broomhilda gave me chills the first time I watched it, seeing him switch completely behind closed doors
Hi
Recently learned that DiCaprio had to pause during one of the scenes because he was so uncomfortable with the number of N bombs he was dropping to which Samuel L Jackson quipped "Motherfucker, this is just another Tuesday for us."
A man who tried to seem smarter and more refined than he actually was
If I had $1000 for every such person I crossed paths with, I could buy all the real estate in lower Manhattan
@@DawoudKringle So true!
Unfortunately our world is full of these types of individuals.
Probably what all these men were. Grubby little turds playing British Lords of the Manor.
@@DawoudKringle but to be honest for his time period he was actually pretty smart basically everybody
in the south was racist at the time but the thing is most southern didn't owned slaves
it was only the elites so he was definitely way smarter than a average southern at that time period the racism
was basically normalized because what he was doing was considered legal so can you really say he was
stupid or just a product of his time even the north that hated slavery was pretty racist they just didn't believe blacks
should be enslaved but they still felt that they were superior to us
I wouldn't call killing someone holding you captive and depriving you of all rights and freedoms "murder". I say that's self-defense.
i think the point is it was murder back then
Yeah maybe in 2022. But not in the 1800s.
I'd call it taking out the trash, I would
It’s still murder. 100% justifiable murder, but still murder nonetheless
Absolutely murder. Murder isn't an unjustified killing, but an illegal one. And killing this scum would have been illegal back then, even if morally right.
i never viewed Calvin Candie as anything more than a cartoon character with just how vile and insane he was, loved what DiCaprio did with his performance, but its interesting to see and hear that he may actually have some layers to him
Analysing Stephen from this movie could also be very interesting imo
Yes, Calvin Candie was a nasty one. However, Stephen is much worse since he pulls the strings from behind the scenes.
That would be a great sequel video.
@Z Moses definitely agree.
Who is this ______ up on that nag?!?!?!
@@downfromthereeefters we get it dude, you like it when he says the n word.
@@calebangell77 - I like the whole movie 😊
Oh man it’s 4:57am and I just finished watching this movie and I came straight to these videos! Django Unchained is easily among my top favorite movies ever!
hell fucking yes!! makes me proud to be able to speak german, i adore schulz!!!
Like most psychopaths, Calvin is a great actor _ I don't mean Leo Di Caprio. Psychopaths can not understand feelings of empathy or even pity but pretend to very well. He also exhibits love for himself vicariously through others like his sister or even Stephen. Thanks so much for the outstanding video!
Damn this is literally my favorite movie of all time. IMO Stephen could get his own video for how evil he is
Stephan is a great villain in that his MO is all about "Fuck you, got mine!"
The way I see Stephen is that he's one of those weasel characters (the kiss ass) but knows how to fool the person in charge, leading them rather than being lead. Kind of like a dog on a leash but is the one pulling and leading the owner to the park. He fooled everyone about needing a cane and his demeanor changes when the situation called for it, like when he figured out about Django wanting to save Broomhilda while Calvin was oblivious - even pointing out Calvin's ignorance to his face without ever receiving punishment for it. It does bring up a logical question: Who was really in charge? Calvin or Stephen? He's also willing to sacrifice other slaves if it means he gets to live a better life compared to them. All he had to do was act the fool when in fact he was the one pulling the strings. As for why he disliked Django, I think it's because of jealousy. He wasn't negative towards him for being a black slaver. He was sour because Django was a freeman, which Stephen wasn't despite his position on the plantation.
I would love to see Michael Fassbenders character from 12 years a slave Epps
Yeah, his character was just as evil and twisted as Calvin Candie.
He was more a stereotypical composite of a slave owner. But wonderfully acted
Find it hysterical that he's basically a weeb for the French
i'm pretty sure they prefer being called "francophiles" 😂
@@sarahnor do you happen to know what Asians are called that are obsessed with Germany, especially the dark times and fanboy over it?
@@edi9892 no
@@sarahnor what a pity. There are plenty of them.
Though, like it was stated, that was very much a thing back then and only really went out of style during WW1.
"The terrible actions he takes, are unfortunately, **BASED***" had me laughing too hard and the "in reality" came too late
Based indeed
@@Spearstormwargames Looks like we got an un-American traitor in our midst.
@@Spearstormwargames based insneed*
Man it's sad when people either try to be edgy and say that slavery and racism is "based" for attention or they're actually just racists who think slavery really is "based"
@@seventeenseventythirteen7465 yes - me (a racist)
Great as always. Nino Brown from New Jack City would be an interesting analysis.
I really do hate how entertaining candy is. I mean I get it’s DiCaprio but hes just so entertaining for how despicable hes characterised to be in the movie.
That's as much Tarantino as it is DiCaprio.
In real life it's often true. Evil people can be charming and entertaining.
Please analyze Tony Montana from the film “Scarface” Always wanted to hear your perspective on the character’s ideals, motives, morals, & ultimately what made & drove him to his self demise.
Very interesting villain no doubt he was evil but felt that he was better than the other murdering drug lords who surrounded him. He had an issue with following a direct order that he knew would cost him his own life because it would of resulted in the killing a woman & child.
He was also overly protective of his sister & felt the need to protect her from an evil world that he help make even more evil resulting to him killing his best and only real friend because he was going to marry sister which only drove his poor sister insane a straight looney nut case.
Tony was toxic and either would eventually kill you or drive those close to him insane.
Tony Montana wasn't evil. He loved children. However he gave off weird vibes over his sister? Have you even seen the film?
@@maratonlegendelenemirei3352 - No he wasn’t evil at all, just killed a dude for a favor. Sold cocaine to the masses and destroyed countless lives, treated his wife like dirt, killed unarmed people, he was more of a Mr. Rogers type character.
@@maratonlegendelenemirei3352 Just watched it about a month ago & he gave very weird vibes off to his sister where she honestly thought he wanted her sexually at the end which was creepy, lol.
But in the restaurant he admits of being the bad guy & embraces it. Also from the same point of view one can say Hannibal Dr Lector wasn’t evil either because he also loved children going as far as punishing a serial child predator right? Gave him a popper making him cut his face up.
He also befriended & saved Clarice’s life more than once. Considering he’s saved more life & was more culturally aware than Tony Dr Lector is far from evil yet he’s been analyzed.
Darth Vader is also not evil for the same reasons when only seeing he’s good traits & ignoring the lives they took.
Nice try though buddy, lol
@@downfromthereeefters His wife was a lazy good for nothing bum. I think Tony did way too much for her as a husband. Tony imported coke but he didn't hold no gun to someones head saying "hey, buy this shit or else"
@@saintbabylon7250 That restaurant scene was full of diners who were all crooks. Tony called them out on their bullshit. “Behind every great fortune there is a crime.”
The moments where he is being all charming and making jokes, would trick you into thinking he had some sort of human side to him. But then the scenes where he is sending his dogs to eat someone else alive or forcing 2 men to fight to the death wake you up from that thought. As well as him just being so nonchalant about it.
Leonardo DiCaprio actually cut his hand in the dinner scene when he smashed the skull.
Calvin Candy also exhibited a sense that he probably was attracted to his widowed sister.
He was no surprise, in my opinion. The fact that he becomes curious about Django suggests that he had a glimpse into the future after meeting and interacting with Django and he dreaded it. Django proved to Calvin that he wasn’t simple minded or a coward.
On a side note, Calvin Candy’s man Steven may have been like a loyal dog, but Steven was just as bad if not a lot worse than Calvin Candy.
"... a man who is as rotten as his TEETH"
I did not notice that! DiCaprio goes above and beyond!
It was not his actual teeth my guy
Those werent his actual teeth
I know, I know
Well, that credit probably goes to the make up department but I agree as an actor DiCaprio is one of the greats.
They really went for accuracy with those fake teeth inserts, that DiCaprio wore for this film. I didn’t even notice them until the third time that I watched this film!! YUCK‼️🤢. Tobacco stained, discolored, and crooked.....totally gross!!
Calvin was a poser and a one upper, Stephen was the true master of that plantation.
To add to the "their skulls are smaller and thus cause deficiencies in mental capability" viewpoint, there have been a multitude of cases of people losing LARGE portions of their brain matter, and returning back to normalcy after some time of "brain rewiring". I remember seeing a video of a man who lost almost 50% of his brain matter, and has a large dent in his head, and after 2 years he was back to full capacity again.
Yeah, minor differences in skull shape do not indicate intelligence capability.
Hence his reliance on frenology and eugenics/social Darwinism
Can you analyze Al Pacino "Tony Montana" I feel that his character played with everyone's emotions. We go from cheering him on to slowly hating what he has become.
Great idea.
Tony's downfall started when he refused blow up the car that had children inside. because Tony had morals and values.... Kinda. Even though he was a bad man, he refuses to kill children so I perceive Tony Montana as a good man.
@@crybaby-killa6155 he sold cocaine
@@bongwaterbaptist yes i know?
@@crybaby-killa6155 he's not a good man
DiCaprio is such a good actor, he made me really hate this vile man every time he opened up his mouth. Cheers on the video.
As an English teacher, I want to thank you for your videos. They’re great resources to study character development.
Perhaps Calvin learned this from his Father and Grandfather. This is a Learned and Taught Behavior.
I agree. Such hatred is passed down from generation to the next
Fun Fact: During the dinner scene Leonardo actually cut his hand and the casts reaction was genuine Leo powered thru it
Including rubbing the blood on her face
@@chrisricks6363 they cut and used fake blood for the blood smearing
Yep! That’s real at first. The scene cut out, our boy LD went and got stitches, then they went back and finished the scene with fake blood.
Although it didn’t occur on camera, there’s a similar story with out other buddy Brad in Seven.
I believe when Leonardo slammed his hand on the table he cut himself on the glass in the process. Yet, he stayed in character making the scene even more believable. 🥃🤚🏥🚑
Yes if you notice when he slams his hand you hear the glass break, he hollered in pain because of it. Then later he is seen picking glass from his hand. Lastly he rubs his real blood on Kerry Washingtons face. Amazing how they all stayed in character but you can tell from their faces that was real.
@@SP-lt5kd He does not rub his real blood on her face. They did several takes and liked the one where he accidentally cut his hand so much that they did another take with fake blood so he could then rub it on her face.
Yes we know!!!!! We have hesrd It a thousand times. But I believe yall d ride him to much.
@@SP-lt5kd that was not real blood lmao
Just throwing it out there, but how about “Immortan Joe” From Mad Max : Fury road?
y. e. s.
That might be cool.
I don't know...I don't think we see enough of him to make a complete analysis...as awesome as he may be
In a death planet as the one in madmax. Inmortan joe is in fact a good guy. Without his brutality, the people at the bottom would used all the water and food in no time, leaving the place in worse shape than Joe’s administration
@@USAads2023 That's a rather insane theory! Do you believe that one individual is capable of administering the ressources, regardless of human loss(!?) - and that people in general aren't to be trusted with their own ressources..? Of course immortan Joe is the bad guy - there's no arguing, unless you're applauding totalitarism.
What's very ironic about Candie's love of the French culture as "being sophisticated" is that every violent and ruthless treatment by Candie to his slaves, the French slaveholders did even worse when they owned Saint-Domingue. The scene with the dogs tearing the old slave apart is directly inspired from the infamous "Rochambeau's Dogs" in the last moments of the French occupation of Saint-Domingue, when Rochambeau had imported slavehunting dogs from Cuba and "tested" them on slave prisoners as a form of twisted entertainment.
If you're interested in tackling someone who is utterly reprehensible and irredeemable, consider an analysis of the title character of _Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer_ (and you could even throw in a mini-analysis of his sidekick Otis as a bonus!).
Saw it years ago. Kinda had a seedy, indie feel to it. Course it's hard to sympathise with serial killers, so maybe that was the revulsion.
@@shanefelkel9966 Agreed, and that revulsion is precisely why he'd make for the subject of a fascinating analysis imho.
@@Galantski intersting contrast between Henry and Otis. One was a purpose driven psychopath with his own ethical code rooted in an aversion to sex and attachment, while the other was simply an opportunistic, predatory sociopath with nothing but hedonistic pleasure as his guide. They were bound to fall out, and did over Otis' sister. I thought the ending was surprising, but in retrospect, Henry stayed true to form.
@@shanefelkel9966 Yeah, and that ending? Just brutal,. Even though we see nothing but Henry leaving the suitcase at the side of the road in the morning, we know he's leaving alone after spending the night with Otis's sister.
Poor Becky, but she should have better sense than to a) visit Otis, and b) fall in love with Henry, who told her (ala the Joker) different versions of how he killed his mother : Stabbed her, clubbed her with a baseball bat, and/or shot her in the head.
@@shanefelkel9966 And you know the big irony? Henry ends up killing Otis after he catches him trying to have sex with Becky ("Don't do that Otis, she's your sister!"), then ends up killing Becky himself after presumably having sex with her.
I'd love to see an Analyzing Evil on Johan Liebert from Monster. That series is exceptional and unfortunately horrifically underappreciated and I'd love it if more attention were payed to it, especially since there's so much to Johan that you could dissect
YES YES YES YES YES
Heck Id have gone with roberto tbh. Hes fascinating. Hes so much more brutish than johan but equally intelligent and ultimately emotionally deadened by the program he was subject to. Its a shame he never met Grimmer face to face it might have awakened something in him like when Johan fainted after reading the book
OMG YESSSS
I'd love to see you analyze the Cable Guy. One of Jim Carrey's most underrated performances in my opinion!
I agree, but is he evil at all really?
@@TheLordexilius Considering he ruins a guy's life out of a creepy obsession, he kind of counts. I'd say he's a tragic villain in the sense that he's mentally sick and desperate for some kind of human connection, which fuels his dangerous actions. Kind of like Leatherface in that both of them do horrible things, but are so mentally warped, you question if they even realize what they're actually doing.
I vote for that!!!
Yes yes !
i do'nt think Carrey's CableGuy can be considered to be featured in these series? I mean by the end he was no hero,but then again can he be placed between Cannibal Lecter,Darth Sidious, John Doe etc?
On my first viewing it was fairly obvious that Calvin had a fascination with his sister and was either having a incestuous relationship, or wanted to. Watched it again recently and after it was mentioned she was widowed it occurred to me Calvin probably had her husband murdered, or had "accidental " death arranged, out of jealousy. Any others that came to that conclusions or have seen it mentioned before?
I would love to see you analyze evil in the Tolkien/Lord of the Rings universe. There are a lot of differing "styles" of evil in that universe, much more than just Sauron and Saruman.
The problem with fantasy villains is that they are evil just for evil's sake. There's no real motivation or nuance to their character or personality.
@@carldrogo9492 Usually you'd be right, but in this case you can find deeper motivations. Sauron desires to dominate all life for the sake of eternal peace and order, for example. Most probably due to Tolkien's books being closer to mythology than normal fairytails
@@carldrogo9492 No, the most nuanced villains with the deepest backgrounds I've ever seen were all entirely fictional. But that's just my experience personally.
"His actions are unfortunately, based."
Willard from “Willard” would make a great subject for this series. Either the 1970s original or the 90s version with Crispin Glover. Loving this channel
This has to be the best I've seen of Dicaprio, imo. It was such a good character to watch
Fun fact: Tarantino considered casting DiCaprio as Hans Landa.
As much as good actor Leo is, I don't think he could have pulled off that facial switch from inviting and mannered to ice cold as Waltz did in the opening scene.
While I love Leo, I'm really glad that he decided to cast a person that can speak German to play a German character.
I think analyzing Stephen would be even more fascinating
You totally have the voice to be a pro voice actor. Love the channel!
That s true he has a golden voice
The revenge django got on him is and his entire property is amazing...django is my hero
"Decadent Monster" is the best way to describe this character
I’d love to see one of these on Micah Bell from Red Dead 2 or Edgar Ross…
Or Dutch
M I C A H
Hmmm has he done one of these for a video game before? Kind of interesting to play through that entire game for a character analysis
@@downfromthereeefters C O L M O D R I S C O L L
Skullface from MGS5
I love how you always line up the character speaking with your hello everyone.
"Below this fine veneer is man as rotten as his teeth." Great metaphor/entendre...that my friend earned you a new subscriber keep em coming. Bravo
I’d love to see a break down of Denzel Washington’s portrayal of Frank Lucas in American Gangster.
Such an amazing movie, loved to hate his character
Why
I was more intrigued and interested as a black man.
Even Leonardo DiCaprio hated this character. He is repugnant. Well written.
Yeah same on the second part of your comment.
I loved his role. Excellent 👌. He was very convincing
This movie is so underrated and in my opinion it's Di Caprio best performance.
it's funny to me because Dr Schultz is generally humble and patient but when faced with what basically is a fedora lord with way too much money he just CAN'T take it and cannot resist the urge to sneak in the little Derringer shot at the best moment
It´s incredible how far they had to push him,to win an Oscar...
leo wasn't even nominated
I freaking love the idea of from the first time Schultz sees Candie he’s just holding back the urge to shoot him dead.
“Calvin may a character of a slave owner, but the behavior Calvin exhibits in this film, and the terrible actions he takes, are unfortunately, BASED”
I think Stephen is a more interesting analysis. Hope you can do him as well