It’s a battle that has been long overdue since Spike has all but forgiven Tyler Perry for his minstrel show depiction of Black people in his films. Tarantino has an odd infatuation with the word “nigger”; an infatuation so passionate and forthright in its use that audiences cringe at every unabashed drop of this n-bomb. It is relatively easy to see why a director such as Tarantino would garner so much controversy in his inclusion of this word in nearly every film – except for the ‘Kill Bill’ series.

He’s a white man from Tennessee with an affinity for Blaxploitation films and frequent use of the outspoken and profanity riddled actor Samuel L. Jackson. While his film technique is unmatched and unique to his erratic personality as a person, I understand the critique from Spike’s point of view as a director who has always had a love affair with the black community and takes his time in expressing the complexities of our culture. Quentin’s recent film “Django Unchained” features a story about a freed slave played by Jamie Foxx that treks across the country with a bounty hunter to rescue his wife from a brutal slave owner. This quick synopsis does little to fully express the graphic visuals that go on during this film, but for well-seasoned Quentin film enthusiasts it’s to be expected.

The most unnecessary critique of the film that has been unfairly cited as a critique from Spike was the constant use of “nigger” in the film. Not only was the word “nigger” the word used for Black’s during the slave era, but in order to accurately depict any historical moment in American history, you must include the unfortunate ignorance that plagued this time. “Nigger” was a consequence of the slave era, and the implications of the word and its many numerous renditions have caused decades of controversy leaving the identity of the word just as confusing as the defense of its post-slavery use. A movie about slavery wouldn’t be transparent in its honest portrayal if it hadn’t used “nigger” 100 times like it was in “Django.” Images of the brutal slave beatings and the near psychotic mental state of the slave owners were necessary characteristics for the films authentic depiction of slavery.

A frequent hiccup that Quentin tends to run into with all of his films is his tendency to exploit cultures for exploitations sake, not for any definitive purpose but to entertain and humor audiences. It’s equivalent to Tyler Perry’s past tendency in using Black actors in his films – which is a great deed on his part – not to challenge them as actors and take advantage of his position but to entertain and humor at their expense. That is the point that Spike was trying to make when he stated that he did not want to disgrace his ancestors by watching this film. Not because it isn’t a great thing that Quentin is highlighting a time in history that has yet to be touched since “Roots,” but because of his intentions behind doing so. He dressed up a genocide that happened in our country and convoluted that powerful and pivotal moment in our history and rather than using it as a teaching moment, used it as a time to humor audiences into thinking freed slaves were bounty hunters dressed in country western apparel.

It is a funny idea, without a doubt, but why did he have to be a slave and why did have to be during the slave era? Wouldn’t it have been just as funny had he not included this time in history that in no way is parallel to a country western? Anyone who has ever caught an early Clint Eastwood country western film on TMC can see that Black people were no where near that set, especially not in the script – not even as an extra. So it is clear that his intent was to capitalize on the irony of placing a Black man in a White dominated scenario and infuse humor and violence in it to water down the message. Quentin’s intent in using certain elements of cultures, especially Black culture, is questionable at best, which is why I understand where Spike is coming from. As a director with clout and respect you are in a position to use American history as more than just a medium for entertainment and humor. I would be lying if I said I didn’t enjoy the film; not every movie or television show is meant to be an agent of change, but heavy topics deserve heavy amounts of respect and good intentions in the purpose of its inclusion, which is an element that Hollywood just won’t understand.