Django Unchained situation - I would like to know your opinions (Spoiler Alert)

[AbbathTheGrim]

bananaking21 said:
*spoilers*

i guess he felt that the man deserved to die, i honestly didnt understand at, it could have been that the director wanted to both gone and django starts a fight with the rest of the people on the farm, i dont know, i didnt really understand it my self either
schultz seemed like the kind of man who didnt believe in slavery, and his experience with django changed him, he could have had enough with candie once he told him to shake his hand, it seemed like shcultz didnt want to be associated with a man like candie, he didnt want to be the same type of man as he is, so when candie insisted on him shaking his hand, it could have meant to shcultz much more than just a hand shake.
honestly, you got me interested in this, waiting to hear what other people say

I get what you mean but I don't know, I think what you are writing is a reflection of my own situation when I try to approach this scene, we are trying to make sense out of something which is a little conflictive.

If we simply dismiss this scene as Tarantino wanting to get the Schultz character out of the way, so that Django's character could go forward in the way he did after Schultz death, that is a sign that Tarantino fucked up the development of a character just to make a story go towards a certain direction. That is cheap, in my opinion. A story needs to develop naturally and not seemed forced. I considered this possibility as well but didn't mention it because somehow I refuse to believe Quentin actually did this. I want to believe there is an aspect of the film I am not considering and that is why I am trying to talk to more minds in this forum here. :)

I can see why Candie is an asshole that deserved to die but, I don't know, didn't you guys feel that Candie may have not been the worst slaver around? He spoke with slaves directly without dismissing them, he listened to them, he had a very friendly relationship with Stephen. Candie actually seemed willing to let Hildi walk away with Django so it was all a matter of money to him.

Maybe Schultz has been kind of out of the slavery reality by going around killing targets and the slave killed by the dog became his first gruesome experience of a slave being abused to such an unimaginable extent, right? But, even though I can understand that Schultz could have gotten pissed at Candie for what he did to that slave with the dogs, he actually did not show any discomfort towards Candie up to the point he had to pay up Hildi's price.

I understand the uncomfortability he could have felt by shaking Candie's hand. But as a smart guy, couldn't he just shake his hand and get it all over with? And then maybe return gunblazing and getting everyone killed including Candie?

This brings me to what Chevinator123 wrote:

Chevinator123 said:
it's weird cause some of the bountys of the other people was alot more then 12k so i didnt know what the big deal was either, maybe he was just pissed that he got owned

If he could have walked away without that money and getting it back with a couple of bounties, what's the big deal, right? The only option left I see is that Schultz was indeed pissed off at being outwitted and maybe he started antagonizing Candie and everything became very vivid (including what he did to the slave with the dog). Maybe he thought that he couldn't return to the plantation to have some revenge after being left humiliated like he was.