You have a protagonist, Django, a recently freed black slave, who is on a mission to find and liberate his enslaved wife. The man who liberated him is a German man who is a bounty hunter, and they make a deal that Django will help him nail a few bounties, and then the German man will help Django retrieve his wife.
And they have a very clever plan which they execute to retrieve Django's wife. And it goes right- until it goes wrong. And then, Django has to improvise. Django has to act.
What's clear is that not saving her is not an option for Django. And it doesn't matter how many slavers he has to kill and how ruthlessly he has to kill them. He is going to save her.
Django Unchained is the story of a man on a mission. And even though it gets dire as hell for him, it only causes him to rain hell down on his enemies- like nothing they have ever seen or thought possible
Now imagine that Quentin Tarantino is directing a story about an under-cover agent who has infiltrated a plot to kill the President of the United States. And it comes down to the wire. Within scant minutes, the President is going to be slaughtered in broad daylight, and this agent knows it full-well. He knows exactly what is about to happen. So what does he do to stop it? What does he do to save the President? What does Quentin Tarantino have his protagonist do?
For sure, it would be a hell of a lot more than Richard Hooke has his protagonist do. Richard Hooke is like the anti-Quentin Tarantino. He is the Bizarro world version of Quentin Tarantino. And I'm sure to Quentin Tarantino, he is the nightmare version of Quentin Tarantino. I'm sure Quentin Tarantino would slit his own throat before writing a story like Richard Hooke's.
If Oswald knew that Kennedy was about to be slaughtered in the street, he needed to be Django. What would Django have done?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.