Cool News
More on SONG OF THE SOUTH!
Hey folks, Harry here. As many of you know, I am a very vocal supporter for a video and DVD release of SONG OF THE SOUTH in the United States aka REGION 1 for the video/dvd crowds. In the past couple of days I have had quite a bit of feedback as to what is going on at Disney, why the film hasn't been rereleased and what it all means. First up was this very nice letter I received explaining the flipside to my case.
First of all, I'm a big fan and check the page every day. I posted this in
talkback, I just wanted to send it to you. I think it is important for you
to consider this in your campaign attempts for this film.
The idea of Uncle Remus isn't necessarily
racist, but the idea of a slave liking his white masters so much that he
wants to stay on the farm has been the crux of critical arguments stating
that Uncle Remus was supposed to be the perfect former slave - Very Uncle
Tom - in a sense that he still performed slavelike duties for the family.
You can talk about the love he has for the children, but there's still a
slave relationship. Uncle Remus is indeed the smartest, coolest guy . .
. but he's still on the plantation. The problem critics have with the work
is that it, at times, presents an African American who accepts his past wrongs on the
condition that it sets him up with a comfortable situation.
Everyone talks about
"The Tar Baby" but no one ever really talks about the story that Harris
wrote where Uncle Remus has a flashback where he kills a Northern soldier,
who could free him, to protect his master, therefore enduring his slavery. What
Harris was (probably) trying to do, even perhaps moreso than play up the
subversive tactics of the slaves, is present an idyllic setting where the
slave remains on the plantation.
A much better collection of short
stories, where the "Uncle Remus" character is subversive even when free,
is Charles Chesnutt's THE CONJURE WOMAN AN OTHER STORIES (and anything
by Chestnutt, for that matter). Unfortunately, the movie does present
elements of the afforementioned "idyllic" setting. Harris' intentions are questionable.
I feel that SONG
OF THE SOUTH, as well as Chandler's collection of Brer Rabbit stories,
is at times terrific entertainment, butit is also dangerous in presenting
a picture of the Reconstruction that is not necessarily accurate or flattering, yet tries
to depict it that way. I think Disney should have been more
socially responsible at the time, and is making an intelligent move by at
least thinking about this decision.
Samthelion
Hey folks, Harry here again. Samthelion lays out quite a few points about the background from whence the Uncle Remus character was drawn. But you know what... in the film. The movie in question. THE ACTUAL DOCUMENT THAT I'M ADVOCATING FOR... There is no mention of slavery. The actual timing and setting of the film is quite vague, but clearly after the Civil War. There is quite a bit of unspoken history between the Grandmother character and Uncle Remus. AND IF YOU KNOW THE WRITTEN SOURCE MATERIAL, then wholeheartedly I understand why you would be offended. BUT THAT ISN'T IN THE MOVIE! ANYWHERE!
This is the same sort of problems a lot of people had with Spielberg's AMISTAD and the character of Cinqué being made out to be a hero, when after he returned to Africa he apparently set up a slaving business capturing Africans and selling them to slavers. Now... I'm aware... That's history, and when you are provoked to READ MORE ON THE SUBJECT you learn the truth behind the myth.
Now my many sources sitting at the table of Eisner have filled me in on what goes on in this realm. A few years back, a research team was put together to gauge the reaction to rereleasing SONG OF THE SOUTH. You see, Disney knows that the release would garner quite a bit of money for the studio on Video and DVD, but at the same time they realize there is a political backside to the film in these days of political correctness and sensitivity... and as a sensitive company feeling the sting of the Baptist and other groups... the last thing they want is more troubles. So they sent copies of a SONG OF THE SOUTH tape out to folks like BILL COSBY and MAYA ANGELOU, as well as Henry Hampton and Julius Wilson. They asked for comments and recommendations for how to handle the rerelease of the film.
Maya Angelou reacted quite strongly. She said
the movie was dehumanizing and that she would
certainly be involved with any boycott or protest. And there were others that reacted in a similar fashion.
Like I said, this was coming down when the Baptist were punching Disney, and Ovitz was being beat up seemingly daily by the L.A. TImes and VANITY FAIR. And the company was terrified of being labeled rascist on top of being a godless company trying to bring violence to America's youth.
There was a split decision with the board at the time, that went against THE SONG OF THE SOUTH, and the official position upon the film became that they would not release the film for the foreseeable future. Basically, they decided to wait till the end of political correctness and folks stopped being so damn sensitive about everything.
So the film continued to be made available in other countries. So the Japanese Laserdisc was struck. Prints were made available in Europe, Australia and in Asia. And in this country you can find blackmarket copies made from the Japanese LaserDisc at conventions and in trading circles.
However, there is an easy answer for DISNEY. Take the Disney name off the film. Don't market it AT children. Let Miramax or Buena Vista label release the film. Return to the original marketing of the film on posters. Which fixated on the "Gone with the Wind"-ish aspects. Retain the song rights in their catalogue. Have CRITERION handle the DVD and include the debate as part of it. The disc would become a $40 DVD, with comments from all sides. Comments from folks like Leonard Maltin and Roger Ebert and Maya Angelou.
However, the film warrants release. Going through the CRITERION label, stripped of the WALT DISNEY name would ensure that parents wouldn't just buy the film and let their kids watch the film unsupervised. Treat the film carefully. Warn people about the content. But release the movie.
Not releasing SONG OF THE SOUTH is very much akin to... oh... taking I KNOW WHY THE CAGED BIRD SINGS out of every school in the country because.... IT IS INAPPROPRIATE MATERIAL! And folks... this happened at my sisters' high school the year after she graduated. There is.... NO DIFFERENCE... between hiding and destroying prints of SONG OF THE SOUTH and pulling I KNOW WHY THE CAGED BIRD SINGS from schools and public libraries. Or Huck Finn or Tom Sawyer or Gone With The Wind or Catcher in the Rye and so on.... Should GONE WITH THE WIND never be released on video? Should all PORN be illegal? Should movies like DEAD ALIVE be banned for inappropriate material? NO... they should be released.... they must be released. If we are to evolve as a culture we can not simply hide our heads in the sand. DISNEY, it is your DUTY as a responsible company to release the film with the PROPER CONTEXT! To set up the story, give a history, both sides.... AND LET THE PUBLIC MAKE UP THEIR OWN MINDS! It would be profitable. Ultimately the problems of the book (which... should this also be banned) are not the problems of the film.... and even if they are... In our culture, we learn from History.... we don't destroy it.
-
+ Expand All
-
Jun 28, 2000 2:32:45 AM CDT
Well Zippadee Do Dah!! Maya Angelou can Kiss my Lily White Ass
by bari umenema
It's NOT RACIST, IT'S A HISTORICAL FILM DAMMIT! Should Supermarkets STOP SELLING Aunt Jemima Pancake Mix and Syrup because AUNT JEMIMA is a throwback to an old-style Mammy? I grew up eating Aunt Jemima Pancakes buckos and I ain't no Racialist dammit!! "My oh My What a Wonderful Day, Plenty o' Sunshine, Headin' mah Way, Zippadee Do Dah, Zippadee Ay!!" Take that Maya Angelou and write another one of your insipid liberal poems about it -- and while you're at it, bring me some o' dem tasty Aunt Jemima flapjacks! Touche Boys Touche!!!
-
I think that using this film as an educational tool is a good idea. Don't just release it like any other Disney film. Put a warning on it. Have parents watch it with their kids and discuss it. I find it kind of interesting that there can be a ride in Disney theme parks about a movie that most children have never seen.
-
Sounds quite reasonable to me, especially if the controversy is brought to light; let anyone who has a problem say what they must and let the viewer decide.
-
Jun 28, 2000 2:45:17 AM CDT
After careful re-reading of Harry's Post, I think he should have
by bari umenema
Not just Disney. His Ideas a while back for how Warners should re-release "The Exorcist" at Halloween time were Righteous and Brilliant. His Criterion Idea for the re-release of "Song of the South" is Smart Enough to bring Smiles to the Faces of the Disney Shareholders. Harry, how the hell did you get so smart? You could not have learned all of this stuff there in Austin -- me thinks you were re-incarnated and retained all of your past knowledge from previous lives sir.
-
Jun 28, 2000 2:47:59 AM CDT
Why are the Posts Out of Order Again? This glitch is ruining th
by bari umenema
-
let criterion handle the dvd?
nice, harry. perhaps it could be released in a quadruple dvd set, in its wholebely-dolbely, along with clips from several well known racist films. the set could be called "the progression of racism", and could include all kinds of neat slander directed toward everyone. White Man's Burden, American History X, Triumph des Willen, that cool darth argument from Chasing Amy, and that little D.W. Griffith film could all say their part. they could jump to a shot of toni morrison every twenty minutes or so, to remind the bad people watching that they are bad. when the der alte Racismus and Schwarzha+AN8- got to steamy-like, mickey mouse could come out, and dance some jitterbug. he could remind us all, in his sweet mickey voice, that his ears are black, his face is peachy-o, his shorts are red, buttons yellow, and shoes brown. good ol' multi-racial mickey. the selma news clips from the sixties could play as the credits rolled for each dvd, with shots of crying celebrities (all races) cutting into the action at three second intervals. dustin hoffman teary-eyed, looking on in horror as a cop sprays down a crowd, followed by sammy jackson getting pissed as a selma cop beats down some "offenders". it would increase awareness, i betcha. -
it's truly too bad that i have no fan base to champion my return. i meant what i said about pop tarts, though. what? my socks tell me i didn't even mention pop tarts. only people in the 'in' crowd get to talk pop tarts. doesn't Gone With the Wind offend anyone? what about neo-nazis? don't they find Casablanca an unflattering portrayal of those nasties preceding them?
-
Having worked in music/video retail for the bulk of the last 10 years, as well as one who is highly critical/skeptical of the Mouse at the BEST of times, I can let you all in on a little secret: do you know who asks for the movie--along with other "racist, politically incorrect" catalog titles such as AMOS & ANDY--more than anyone else? BLACK PEOPLE. Believe it or not, those two titles in particular--SONG OF THE SOUTH and AMOS & ANDY (which is not Disney but which IS withheld for similar reasons to SOTS)--are highly in demand among people of colour, and when I diplomatically explain the reasons these titles are witheld, the reaction ranges from mild amusement to indignat outrage. The consensus is that it's white people with a guilty conscience for things they never did making decisons on the basis of what MIGHT offend someone, which in turn is found MORE OFFENSIVE by the very people they are trying to NOT OFFEND!!!!!! Ah the irony...but then what do you expect from a company that puts a family face on mafioso business tactics, treats children as both commercial pawns AND some sort of inhuman creature of innocence, AND ruins classic literature? Isn't it ironic, indeed.....
-
People are stupid sometimes. I mean, why do so many groups end up whining and crying over every little thing that might possibly be taken as offensive? The last time I checked, this was a free country. If I want to watch Song of the South, by God, I WILL. If you think it's offensive, then don't watch it. If you think Tom Sawyer or I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings is offensive, don't read them. But they are in print because they were written and released by an artist who cared enough about his or her thoughts to write a book or direct a movie about them. Who are you to say what is offensive and what is not? I'm a Christian, ok? Well, John Carpenter is one of my favorite directors and I was watching his film Vampires just the other night. One of the characters wears a shirt featuring an upside down cross. Did I get offended? No, I did not, and I'll tell you why...because that guy is a fictional character in a fictional movie and there's no reason to get bent out of shape about something that trivial. Men and women have been dying for this great country for years and all these little politically correct groups are trying to tear down every bit of freedom these men and women have given them with their blood, sweat, and tears. Song of the South is a great movie (they took my entire grade to see it in the theater back in elementary school, sometime in the 80's) and I don't have anything against black people at all. I do, however, have something against all these super-sensitive people (white, black, male, female, gay, straight) who want to cry all over the American flag and lay a big guilt trip on everyone because something isn't going their way or because something "offends" them. Well, let me tell you all somthing...life isn't fair! Get over it! I've had my heart broken by girls I've known. Should I form a group of protesters to go against females? No. I just accept the fact that life isn't always fair and I move on. No harm done. Disney is cowering behind all these seemingly anti-American groups of crybabies instead of listening to the one source that should make most of their decisions for them...the Constitution. All you protesters and whiners out there ought to be very thankful every day of your life that you live in a country that allows you to have an opinion on your own. No doubt someone will be offended by something I've said, but you know what, this is America and I have a right to voice my opinion, just as you have a right to voice yours. And if you don't like how we do things in the good ole' U.S. of A, then leave. It's a free country, no one is stopping you. Disney, release Song of the South! Harry, keep up the good work! Everyone else out there, have a great day and go watch The Patriot! Talk to you guys later! :) - Wes
-
Face it, Song of the South (like Birth of a Nation and Gone With the Wind) is a RACIST film. period. Don't give me any bullshit explanations, these films are RACIST. That being said I think they should release them. They're important documents of race relations in this country. Disney (along with warner brothers and MGM) Have all made some embarrasingly racist cartoons (WB's Pitch Black and the Seven Darkies, no I'm not kidding) and they should be shown so we can see how casual racism was in American Society. What about the Siamese Cats in the otherwise excellent Lady and the Tramp?...slant eyes, buck teeth, C'MON. It seems a lot of ANGRY WHITE MALES resent the fact that their John Wayne/Gary Cooper view of American History is being exposed for what it really was...Racism is a complex dynamic and its not going to be solved in this Talkback (especially with idiotic sayings like Jesse Jackson can KISS my lily white ASS!)... But I DO say release SONG OF THE SOUTH.
-
Jun 28, 2000 4:26:15 AM CDT
NEWS FLASH: MANY SLAVES DID STAY WITH THEIR FORMER OWNERS
by robertblood
Even IF it had been depicted in the film, history shows that many of the slaves continued to work on the plantations that they called home. Ever wonder why there is still a large black population in what was once the Confederate states? Answer: not everybody had the balls to take the 40 acres and a mule offer. Not everyone likes to leave their home, no matter how much greener it is on another plantation.
This seems like Disney's attempt to instill a kind of corporate Orwell by rewriting history (Pocahontas & especially Mulan were ludicrous examples of modern day western philosophies being adapted for seemingly historical stories). And no, even if they learn from a very young age, a lion cannot become a vegetarian, no matter what disney says. -
Sorry Harry, but I do not believe it is Disney's "DUTY" to release anything. It is their property and if they want to keep it for themselves, it is their business. I agree that the government should not be allowed to force any company to release or to censor any material, but if the company feels they do not want to provide to the public something that THEY OWN they have the right to make that decision. There is no "DUTY" here.
You are screaming for the release of various material with the same voice as those screaming for it's destruction, Both screaming for Disney to do their "duty" by releasing/destroying all offensive material.
I am all for the release of the Song of the South. I feel that todays society is too fuckin' sensitive about bad words and hate speech. If Disney feels that they can release it without any financial concequences, then more power to them, but if they could take a financial hit by releasing it, their only DUTY is to those who have a standing interest in the company, the stockholders.
Viva la Capitalism.
Rikturscale -
Very simple: most of them had no money, no non-agricultural skills, and nowhere to go. They became sharecroppers, which is almost as bad as slavery. That's why the great northern migration didn't take place for another 50-80 years, until the slaves' descendants had the money and the opportunity to leave.
"Song of the South" has about as much business in general release as "Triumph of the Will." Harry's dislike of strong women is evident. It's a shame he's equally willing to disregard the feelings of a considerable number of his fellow citizens to satisfy his greedy desire for a racist film to be shown simply for its technical brilliance. -
I'm not opposed to fictionalizing history, but from a DRAMATIC point of view, what a crushing killer twist ending it would have been -- something very minimalistic, like a title card reading "Cinque returned home to his native Africa, where he set up a slaving business capturing and selling Africans" -- it would have left audiences reeling in shock and disorientation. It would have turned a strong film into an unforgettable one -- not something you can often do with a title card. Of course, I don't know how reliable the history on this point is, and while it's one thing to turn an imperfect man into a hero, it would be another thing entirely to libel the name of a good man. So I would be opposed to doing this, no matter how good it would have been as drama, unless it were historically valid.
-
I bet this post isn't even going to go to the bottom of the current TalkBack.
-
I was right.
-
Great idea for rerelease of Song of the South, Harry! There's no better intellectual exercise, no better way to serve the good of society, than to make controversial material available, and have a conversation about it. Anyone who's ever read Huck Finn would know that it is a powerful statement against racism. People who go through it with a word-search, and find bad things, are missing the context.
I've spent most of my adult life defending our constitution, defending our rights, free speech among them. Are they under attack from the Soviets? The Chinese? No. They are under vigorous attach from vocal extremists on the right and the left, who tell us, "You can't read that, you can't see that, because I don't like it." From the right or the left, extremism comes to look a lot like the National Socialist Party.
I like the idea of providing a context for Song of the South. It's brilliant, it's controversial, and people would talk about it. They'd buy a lot of them, too. -
Ironically, the hypersensitive idiots who insist on keeping this film out of release are doing a great disservice to the actor who played Uncle Remus, James Baskett, who should be recognized historically as the first black actor to have a leading role in a motion picture. SONG OF THE SOUTH says NOTHING about slavery, positive or negative, it simply tells the Uncle Remus tales within a framework which shows blacks and whites living in a state of harmony (not a bad message for the kids) and particularly shows Uncle Remus as a good and wise man. Is it an accurate portrayal of the sharecropper era? No, but it's not meant to be. Maybe Maya Angelou and her ilk would prefer to sit four year olds down in front of ROOTS so thy can see the evil white man whipping poor Kunte, but I think I'll keep letting my four year old son watch the white folks learn some valuable lessons from Uncle Remus on the $40 black market tape I bought of SONG OF THE SOUTH.
-
The whole movie's in that damn ride. Release Song of the South!
-
Jun 28, 2000 7:32:38 AM CDT
Bill Cosby listen up...don't be a fascist and keep "Little Rasca
by houdini25
In the same vein as "Song of the South", let's get the Little Rascals back on tv or DVD. To heal any kind of racism or bigotry we must educate the future generations and not hide any possible evidence.
-
So, Disney is afraid to start a controversy. hmmm, What happened when they decided to celebrate Gay Day in their theme parks?
Not to mention the movie is sooo wrong to distribute, but they'll base one of our more popular rides on it. They're a bunch of hypocrites. -
Probably the best argument yet on this topic. But all you really need to say is the bit about "...is it right to pull Tom Sawyer...". It really is no different. I love Ebert, but this view should cause him to stumble.
-
is NOT racist. Don't believe that same line of bullshit you keep on hearing. The only thing "racist" about it is that two Jews played two black men...but Ted Danson doesn't have a problem with that now does he? What about the black actors playing white actors in theater or vice versa?..............A n' A was huge during the 30's, unfortuneatly none survive from this time, we only have a few from the late 40's, early 50's, which by that time were'nt as good as the 30's. But I own them all, and they are funny as hell...and Amos possess more intelligence than Jack Benny, Bing Crosby, Burns, Fiber McGee and all the other OTR comedian charchters combined.
-
Claiming that there is no mention of slavery in SOTS is very similar to claiming there is no mention of homosexuality in "Rope" or "Rebecca". The fact is that, regardless of what is specifically mentioned in the film and also regardless of when it takes place, the film IS about a slave/master relationship. This is the point that Samthelion was trying to make, it seems to me. I can tell you that, as a child, I thought of SOTS as representing a slave/master relationship, and I confess to leaving the movie thinking "See, it wasn't so bad for the slaves", and THAT, my friend, is a wrong and dangerous way to react to the film.
That said, I don't necessarily think the film should be kept from release, and perhaps releasing it with a disclaimer and a parent's guide would be a good idea. Unfortunately, I don't know how many parents would bother discussing the films themes with their kids. You see, what is often lost in these discussions of so-called censorship (ala Melody Time), is that these films are PRIMARILy seen by kids, and Disney is going to filter all their decisions through that fact. -
Well,this is an interesting topic,isn't it? Racism is a very ugly and ignorant thing,but then again,so is censorship. I think that the film should be released. We all have the power to get up and change the channel,if we do not like what we see. Besides,they way I see it,those who forget the past,are destined to repeat it. Maybe we all should see it.To see how far we've come and see that we still have a long way to go.
-
Disney has an obligation to their
stockholders. Bad PR could drive
their stock price down, which if
severe enough could result in a
lawsuit. Of course for this to
happen over one little video
release is so unlikely as to
border on absurd, but a few bad
decisions in a row could mean
trouble. Disney is just trying
to behave as a responsible
corporation should -- that is to
say, with avarice. Disney is
just a corporate machine doing
what all corporate machines are
programmed to do -- make money.
There is no conscience to guide
them. To a corporation, a film
is not a work of art; it is a
commodity. They care only about
what is profitable, not about
what is right or wrong. Whether
or not Harry's idea would
guarantee a profit, I can't say.
But it isn't as simple as taking
the Disney name off of the box.
Disney is merely a symptom of a
much bigger problem. -
SOTS should be released, but with a forward segment discussing the historical context of the film in a way that kids can understand and appreciate. It's not a nuclear warhead, folks. It's just a movie.
Also, I'd like to emphasize that there is some accuracy in the portrayal of a slave staying on the plantation. Many, in fact, did so--not because they thought slavery was good, but because they'd never known anything else, didn't think they had marketable skills or were scared to go out into the world. Slavery is sorry preparation for the challenges of participating in a capitalistic economy, obtaining housing and the hundreds of other things we take for granted today. And as in any group of people, the freed slaves were bound to include both the risk-takers and the risk-averse among the freed slaves. The risk-takers would have been eager to launch into a new kind of existence and all the challenges that went with it, but the risk-averse would have been more likely to stay in the only existence they'd ever known.
My family is from the south, and my mother tells me that one of our ancestors once bought a very small boy who was crying on the auction block--his mother had been sold and taken away and he was too little to be of use, so he was left behind. The story, accurate or not, is that this ancestor bought him out of pity and took him home. Anyway, the little boy grew up and stayed with this family after the Civil War was over. How do I know this? My mother actually met the man when she was a little girl, visiting the home of some relatives. He was extremely old, but he still lived with the same family and was taken care of by them. Was he wrong to stay with them when he could have had his freedom? I don't know. I don't know all the circumstances and I can't know what he was thinking. And was his life idyllic and wonderfully happy? I very much doubt it. But that really was what some freed slaves chose to do, right or wrong. So, Uncle Remus staying on the plantation is not without basis in historical fact. And his doing so could easily be dealt with and put into a realistic perspective through the use of a thoughful introduction placed before SOTS on VHS and DVD. -
Yes I believe these sort of films are of historical value. It shows just how fucking stupid the WHITE mentality was towards other races back then and to a degree NOW.
-
That wasn't funny Harry.Don't even joke about them banning Dead Alive.I would be forced to kill.
-
ah yes, the famed SOTS. wasn't quite a moving as FC, G, or M, or GiSS, but better dialogue, IMHO. BTW, i can't wait for disney's latest film, A. the last cartoon that showed that much promise was TRTE. DGMW, dreamworks' animation division, also known as K (he put the "K" in "SKG", ya know), went all out; took the piss out of D. well, that's M2C... LOL. help, someone.*****a man down the road from mom is a racist. he's not one of those fair-weather racists. he hates more than just the ol' african-americans. he has a big german flag on his front porch, with a big white 'x' drawn across all three colors on the banner: black, red, yellow. he shot his son the mechanic as he walked across the yard, because the poor boy forgot to wash the oil and badness from his skin before he came home. the family bought him a nice white casket. my unkle likes cheese. is this off subject? uncle remus boogedy boogedy. brar patch zambliddy doy. ich lebe f
-
Why does it feel like I'm living back in Austin, watching the close-to-nazi actions being taken by the folks of Round Rock in their book tossing fury? This is ridiculous. Disney needs some backbone. There's a way to handle everything. From Pecos Bill and his cig to Uncle Remus in a film that is full of love and treat each other right morals. Yes, he was a slave. Who cares? I don't. I certainly care more about the interesting stories and the love shown in the film. People against this need to get off the soapbox and rethink their let's fight anything we can come up with attitude. Once again, we're left with the beautiful imagery of people putting wars where none exist.
-
it's actual. Everything is satisfactual. ***** As a child, SOTS was my LEAST favorite Disney movie. This had nothing to do with racial issues and everything to do with the lack of a beautiful princess. BTW -- Nice animation from The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, Harry!
-
"Song Of The South" is a good movie and everyone who clains that this shit's has racist tendencies, well, you have all got everything completely wrong. "Gone With The Wind" on the other hand, is a bit racist (and it's not a good movie). What's next, huh? "American History X" is hidden racist propaganda. Please...Y'all waste everyone's time with that kind of bullshit!!!!!
-
Thanks for showing your ignorance, and thanks for proving my point...How did you draw the conclusion that I have no desire to work for a living? Funny Stuff.
Then you say I want to reverse the Power Structure? Thats the funniest thing I've heard in a while...are you implying that Whites are at the top of the food chain and should stay there? That just doesn't make sense. You my friend are deluded (I won't stoop to calling you an idiot). Oh yeah, did that new suit you bought come with a pointy hood with two little eyeholes? -
Disney should hire Luther Campbell to direct the public relations angle of the re-release of SOTS. (Who better has personally experienced the depravity of being "banned" in the USA) The title of the movie could be changed to "As racist as they wanna be" and a Springsteen ripoff could be release simultaneously as a promo. This package would sell billions.
-
Uncle Remus, had he been real, would have hated all your white asses. 'nuff said.
-
Don't expect to see sanity regarding SOTS until the nation as a whole is willing to recognize that, since blacks are equal to whites, they're equal in the unpleasant ways, too. No one asks the Klan if they think people will be offended, so why asks racists like Maya Angelou? We may see SOTS when Farrakhan, Sharpton, M'Fume & friends are grouped with the Klan and other disturbed individuals.
-
Actually it was called, COAL BLACK AN DE SEBBEN DWARFS.
-
First off, you are partially right. It's a shame that this movie is not available on the United States. I've looked into buying a foreign version and having it converted to VHS just so I and my grandmother could watch it. I'm even disappointed with Disney for not rereleasing the film. However, your claim that Disney's decision not to rerelease this move is tantamount to a school district's decision to remove a book from its library is completely wrong. Disney's decision is completely rational in our capitalistic society. They are afraid, justifiably, that although they would gather a lot of money from selling the video that they would also lose some of the enormous good will that they possess with the public. Disney is paranoid with respect to its desire not to harm its good will. Disney makes billions on its good will. I don't like their decision, but it makes sense. Public censorship is different. Public censorship is someone deciding that you can't read/see/hear something that they did not create for moral, political or military grounds. It is someone else deciding what you can be allowed to experience. Disney owns the copyright on Song of the South. Break up the word copyright. They have the RIGHT to decide to COPY the movie. They've decided not to copy the movie. The real crime here is how long a copyright now lasts. The copyright was created to encourage people to produce original works of art by giving the creator an exclusive rights for a certain period of time. After that period of time the copyrights revert to the public. The duration of copyrights has been dramatically extended over the course of the last two decades (approximately). For the real crime, spend some time figuring out the motivation behind the extension of copyright durations. You might find this story comes full circle.
-
This country started going to hell the minute ROCKY IV was released. Critics bashed it as being "American propoganda". AS IF YOU CAN HAVE TOO MUCH AMERICAN PROPOGANDA?!?! What kind of country have we become? ROCKY IV was a wonderful movie because it made you feel great to be an American. No doubt if it were released today there'd be all sorts of arguements and controversy surrounding it...stuff like "it made communists look evil" or "oh, so its the black man who gets killed!" or "this movie makes women look like whiny, scared stereotypes." SHOOOO! This kind of stuff ticks me off. Why don't people see the whole picture by reading the entire book of Huck Finn? Because if they did that, A) It would make a whole lot more sense, and B) People would have nothing to bitch about. Yeah, I know I said I was a Christian, and yeah I just said "bitch" but you know what, I'm not perfect, and I admit that. A lot of people can't admit that. Movies like GONE WITH THE WIND and AMERICAN HISTORY X are not racist. Not everything is meant to put someone down (AHX actually had a good message about learning to tolerate people you'd previously had something against). Why didn't men protest THELMA AND LOUISE? They sure could've. People of all races, genders, and nationalities need to stop being so paranoid about ridiculous things. Not everybody is out to get you. Once again, just so nobody takes this stuff the wrong way, I will repeat what I said in my previous post: I have nothing against black people. I have many black friends. I do, however have something against people of any race, gender, sexual preference, or nationality that react in stupid ways to something that should just be entertainment. SONG OF THE SOUTH is a wonderful movie and it should be made available. Should Warner Bros. ban THE EXORCIST for it's content? THE EXORCIST offended me at some points. Did I get bent out of shape about it? Nope. It's just a movie, and I'm secure enough in my belief in God not to let a movie (of all things) bother me. What if I had something against yellow bricks? Should THE WIZARD OF OZ be banned just because of me? See how ridiculously nit-picky this stuff can get? And the sad thing is, it IS often this nit-picky. Everyone will always get offended at something if they look at it the wrong way. If you're looking to get offended, you will get offended. I'll get off my soapbox now. Talk to you guys later. Take care.
-
Excellent points Harry. A couple points of my own.
1. If Disney really felt that the film was innappropriate material then they shouldn't release the film in other markets. Their willingness to market the film overseas basically admits that they are just controlling their image and that they really have no consistent opinion on the matter.
2. On a recent trip to Disney World I was pleasently surprised to find the Brer Rabbit and friends characters sprinkled throughout the Splash Mountain ride. Now, only the "cute" animal characters were there but I was still shocked as I was already aware of Disney's stance on Song of the South.
I am in complete agreement that this film deserves to be released. However what really chaps my hide is that Disney doesn't have the guts to take a consistent stand. When it suits them they do one thing, when they are worried it will get some people riled they do another. How very lame.
- P.Stallion
-
Jun 28, 2000 12:28:16 PM CDT
More Blacks fought for the South than the North in the Civil War
by dunknutee
it's true, but while we may see a movie like Glory, we will never see the flip side. And yes, many African-Americans did stay on the plantations.
Now, these may not be things that as a nation we are proud to say or show in movies. BUT THEY DID HAPPEN, so why are we hiding history from our citizens?
Disney, just release the damn film.
-
I've been telling people this for a long time. I'll read a book, see a movie, then examine the world around me and instantly I am taken aback, noticing how we are losing our freedoms. Anybody see the movie PCU? Damn funny, but right on target. People are so afraid to have a strong feeling about certain issues that we've created a culture of self-censorship out of this notion of political correctness.******So I went to a rave the other night. I had a fantastic time. I danced with 2 Asian girls. I asked if they were sisters (because I felt they had a similar "vibe" and features). The responded: "It's because we're Asian, right?" I dropped my head into my hand. That's just plain ignorant. That would be like saying me and Mark Wahlberg are brothers because we're white.*********It's these kinds of behaviors that are furthering the rifts between ETHNICITIES (Science has rejected the term "race"). If we cannot look back and view SOTS for what it was at the time, what do we learn? Well, we learn that the best way to avoid these issues is to delete the scenes, take them off the shelves, don't release the film, don't take any chances that you might've done in the past for the sake of creativity and enlightenment. Maya Angelou should be ashamed of herself. In so many ways we've been a pretty awful society here in America. But with the existence of our abilities to say, write, strum, sing, film, print, and record, we overcome these problems with empathy and understanding. I hope that at some time we might all see this truth.
-
Harry, that is one of the best ideas in the history of this site. I hope some of the pansy-ass wimps at Disney read what you have to say and realize that Criterion could do with Song of the South what they could not-- present it in its proper context. The only context Disney knows in spelled P-R-O-F-I-T.
-
Being a white person I can never really know how this film makes an African American feel, but I do know how it makes me feel.
I saw this film in theaters as a kid in 1972 and again in it's last theater run in 86. I also have the UK (PAL) version of the video.
I loved Uncle Remus as a kid. He was so kind and wise. I also recognized that the slave/master relationship sucked. Remus was told what to do and got in trouble for simply telling the children stories. He eventually was forced to leave the plantation. That's not a happy relationship. Remus didn't rebel as some would have liked him to, but he had no power.
His role is treated very respectfully in my opinion. Uncle Remus is almost like Yoda, but teaching you to use your imagination and your wits instead of the force. -
A few years ago I e-mailed Disney arguing the fact that this wonderful movie should be released to the public. Hey, its mostly a fucking cartoon. Anybody that is offended by this movie will be offended by every movie released today. You can find something politically incorrect with every movie released. Song of the South was, in my opinion is a beautiful told story. Tell me that Gone With the Wind was not about slavery. I had much rather sit thru 90 minutes of Song of the South than sit thru 3 hours of Scarlett. If anyone notices, Song of the South has quite a few lessons in life for both black and white children. I am fortunate to have a copy on video and my family has enjoyed this fine movie. I saw this movie for the first time when I was a kid, and have wanted a copy since the invention of the video. My son, who also enjoyed the movie, acquired a copy for me this last Christmas, and I will be forever grateful to him. But, if I were Eisner, I wouldn't release the movie either. He is just enforcing the fact that the special interest groups are still running his business.
-
Arwin is right; this is not a case of public censorship but self-censorship and Disney has every right to protect themselves from a backlash of racism cries from the public. However, Disney keeping "Song" off the video shelves or even out of the store catalogues for those who wish to special order it IS someone else deciding what we (meaning those people who want to see or buy the film) can be allowed to experience. It is a decision made for our children, as well, and is taken out of the hands of the parent. Censoring "Song" from the public is very similar to censoring works like "Huckleberry Finn" and "Catcher in the Rye" because it is based on the product's content and the possibility that it might offend a good enough number of people. The only difference is that the decision was made *by* Disney and not for them. It would be the same as a publishing company who owns the copyright not distributing one of these books. It still doesn't erase the fact that the movie is not available to film lovers and students. I also would like to point out that most of the people here who are complaining DO understand that Disney is a business and this is a business decision to protect their image in the U.S. and I'm assuming Canada. That reasoning doesn't erase the fact that the movie isn't available to us even in a contextual form. It also doesn't erase the fact that Disney is being hypocritical by putting the film for sale in other markets and that they have a ride and sell some merchandise with certain characters from it.
-
so because maya angelou is offended by the film i may never get a chance to see it. i shan't cry the next time one of her books is banned by some southern school board.
-
Rip that Mouse a new one, because as a certain Fictional charector would say "Disney is the DEVIL!"
HAHA.
Nice HHG there my good man, that looks like it's got to hurt. -
He is bashing everyone who says anything negative about certain White people and takes it personally. Makes me wonder if he is a one of those loser White Supremacists.
-
I guess this country does need to talk more about the Civil War because it wasn't originally fought over slavery. The war started because of the South's secession from the United States over various reasons. The issue of slavery was part of the original reason, but not the main reason the war started. That's a common misconception. Slavery didn't become as prevelant an issue as many think today until later in the war. Anyways, just wanted to clear that up.
-
Harry said, "DISNEY, it is your DUTY as a responsible company to release the film with the PROPER CONTEXT!" But Harry. Disney is NOT a responsible company. Michael Eisner, et al, only care about the money. If they care about their image, it is ONLY as it relates to their ability to make more money. However, I think you have some valid arguments. One question I have for anyone who has seen both Song of the South and Gone with the Wind: is Song of the South anymore offensive than GWTW?
-
In the case of Song of the South, as opposed to the other Disney cuts you originally reported, I think it makes sense to leave it on the shelf. Race relations are extremely sensitive, and the least bit of controversy provides nothing but an opportunity for hate-mongers, black or white, to tear open old wounds and force divisions, when the vast majority of average blacks and whites want nothing more than equity and harmony. In situations like this, I think you need to defer to blacks on how they feel about it. They are the ones who've suffered the injustice and its lingering effects, and therefore they should be given all due respect and sensitivity. If they don't like the movie, screw it- let it collect dust.
The only other thing I'd like to add is an old saying that still holds true, in my experience:
"In the North, they don't care how big black people get, as long as they don't get too close. In the South, they don't care how close black people get, as long as they don't get too big." Rich northern snobs and southern rednecks both need to let the Civil War be over.
-
To: Shimada, et. al. espousing your theories. As a white male, I don't subscribe to your ideas (minorities looking for a reversal of the power structure, being lazy [really !@$##@ nice there], etc.). The problem with people on either side who speak in these terms is that they a) try to speak for everyone or b) take the comments of one person and believe that person speaks for everyone matching their demographic. We all have our own ideas and reactions. Maya Angelou would lead a protest, but not every African American writer is going to support her. Pat Buchanan would probably watch the movie as a documentary, but not every white male would.
That said, I would like to see SOS only because it exists as an historical document. It's racist (even if we claim only in source material) and offensive to many people. So are lots of things. Some day we'll be able to see this because there will be more equality of opportunity in the US and movies like this will be viewed as historical documents. -
The Euros, aka "Whites", were in the perfect position for a rise to power because of trade routes, climate, and technology. The Spaniards wiped out thousands of indians with their diseases when they landed in the Americas. They used numbers and superior weaponry to overpower the African tribes one by one because they LACKED CENTRAL LEADERSHIP, just like the Native Americans. We need to stop looking at it as color vs color, because if you look towards the rest of the world, you see people that look exactly alike killing each other over religion and tribalism. Slavery in the United States was caused by greed, pure and simple, and everything else derived from it. The Aztecs at the height of their power enslaved and slaughtered the weaker tribes around them. The Japanese and Chinese have been going at it for centuries. Look at Kosovo. The only way to combat this is education. The state of our schools in this country is PATHETIC. Recycling hatred will not fix anything.
-
The U.S. Govt. apologized to blacks for slavery and what did it accomplish? Nothing. Racial tension is higher than ever. Apologies only ressurect the past and the anger that comes with it. It must not be forgotten, or so will the lessons learned, but we need to start living in the future because it's looking mighty bleak at this point. All of this apologetic behavior is causing a backlash. I am caucasian and native american, so I am not 100% of anything, am I? Should I get offended when people call me white? But one thing I do have in common with a lot of people is that I'm an AMERICAN - 100%. That is something that can unify us. If there was another World War, I'd predict it would have a very positive effect on ethnic tensions -- for awhile at least. Before we settled back into the comfort of our neighborhoods and no longer challenged ourselves or our children to embrace the possibility of a unified America.
-
People are saying that Disney is a hypocrite because it is releasing SOS overseas. The only way that Disney would be acting hypocritically is if their decision not to release SOS in North America was based on moral consciousness that SOS is a racist piece of work. However, I think that the real reason Disney has chosen not to release SOS on video is not because of any moral consciousness, but is instead based on purely economic grounds. Disney has decided that Europeans are not going to be offended by SOS and that releasing SOS in Europe is not going to hurt their good will. Disney has also decided that releasing SOS in North America will unleash a firestorm of controversy which might injure their good will. I don't see anything hypocritical about making rational economic choices.
-
Thanks for the thoughtful, measuerd post... but don't get me wrong, I totally agree with Disney releasing thisfilm, even though it's RACIST as hell. But they are acting RESPONSIBLY by not releasing them. They understand that a lot of parents trust the name Disney to stand for harmless entertainment for their children. And a lot of parents won't even watch it... just sit their kids in front of the TV and go about their merry way. Disney understands that... plus the movies an embarrassment to them. So even though I have no problem with the release of the film, I do commend Disney for taking PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY for the movie...
-
I think that rather than ask permission from Maya Angelou and Bill Cosby, it would be a rather interesting experiment to round up a group of twenty or twenty-five young kids of all ethnicities, sit them down in a room with the movie, and then ask them to give their own impressions of the movie after it was over. If the black kids start crying and the white kids start cracking whips on the black kids' backs, then don't release the movie.
-
He's cooooool.
-
harry long time reader of the site,i think the "song of the south" shouldnt be released i remember seeing as a kid i really dont remember much about it except my dad turning it off and getting pissed at the disney channel but if they do release it they should have warning labels on the outside to warn the consumer about his/her purchase.
this is kinda off topic but isnt the ride splash mountain at disneyland based of "song of the south" -
i will admit that i have not read the source material for song of the south but do own a japanese laser "import." i showed this film to a friend of mine who grew up in s. carolina, citadel family, etc. he showed me his family documents where great-great-grandfather's slaves fought with him against the union forces. the slaves' rationale, he did not want to see his FRIEND killed. so, before anyone wants to suggest anymore censorship, and ban the movie, explore all sides like harry proposes on the dvd. hell, maybe this would even be a good segment for "politically incorrect."
-
historically, many slaves stayed with their masters after the war. They had no place to go and the plantation was the only home they ever knew. If they went north they were often treated poorly. The south was even worse. Some slave owners offered shelter and jobs for their slaves and the slaves took them. Many even died on the plantations and are buried there. So the whole argument of the "Happy Uncle Tom" is stupid because, in many ways, it is historically accurate.
-
To me, to call something RACIST means that it presents an inaccurate or unrealistic concept as argument against people of a certain race.
In that respect, the black servant-nymph in "Fantasia" was indeed racist, insofar as it suggest blacks would be slaves even on a god-plane of existence. Mickey Rooney in "Breakfast at Tiffany's" presented a racist performance, as he exaggerated asian characteristics for purely comic effect.
That said, I say SOTS has no racism in it at all, the events depicted in the film could and probably did happen during that historical period in U.S. history. The parents in the film are quarrelling, insofar as Johnny's father highly objects to his mother-in-law's use of slaves. Dad leaves in protest, and there is fear he may never return. This is what drives Johnny to seek the company of Uncle Remus, who consoles the boy with colorful tales.
The problems both blacks and whites may have in this film have nothing to do with racism but everything to do with FEAR OF THE PAST. Politically-Correct whites get the shakes and shivers with anything that reminds us of the U.S.'s history of whites owning black slaves. The only media dealing with that issue that is seen today is that which is produced solely to make a strong anti-slavery statement. If it's not about that, then they don't want to hear about it. Politically-Correct african-americans are embarrassed by a film such as this because of its strong us of ebonics! It is a sore reminder of many of them are still affected by slavery to this day.
Do I demand a video release of this movie? NOT if Disney plans to release a hacked up version like "Make Mine Music". If you can't do something right, then don't do it at all.
As per Harry's suggestion that a Criterion release would absolve Disney of all responsibility: YA RIGHT HARRY - WHAT-E-VER -
Remember the old SNL skits where Mr.Mike would tell stories with Uncle Remus? In Mr.Mike's stories Breher Rabbit always died a gruesome death and that would upset Uncle Remus and make him cry.That wasn't very p.c. was it?But it sure was funny as hell.
-
Jun 29, 2000 9:44:33 AM CDT
SOS? you mean Summer of Sam? perhaps Song of Solomon? Sit or
by my colon sucks
arrggghhhh? you lazy fucking acronymites! I F H U S S O B! S! S I N, P! I C T I!*****i will keep the drano down this time, oh yes i will. don't look at me that way! i mean it. i can't read.
-
As a race of humans, all colors, we are fallible in that we find it hard to believe and enjoy what we want while still trying to exist in a politically correct enviroment. Now I remember watching Song of the South as a littlin and I don't remember any "white supremacy" thoughts going through my head. My mom would read the brer rabbit stories to me every night, they were my favorite, and I don't recall any thoughts in my mind of the "white" man repressing the "black" man. As a child the stories tickled the imagination in only the way that rabbit could when trying to get the tar baby to talk, or hiding in the brair patch. Now as an adult, I can look at these stories, and see the ideas of the time, which I disagree with, because of what I was taught, both in school and at home. But I would never watch this movie without being the child I can be inside. Anyone who would watch this movie without having any connection with the child inside, is not watching the movie for entertainment, they are watching it to get one more "example" to express from their soapbox tirade. Children aren't racists, adults are, and only because they want to be. These stories helped create the thoughtful and caring, and non-racist, parents we all are today, so why in the world would we keep these from our children.
Peace to all!! -
Ever felt like you've been sitting around watching television for hours, but you are unaware of what you have been watching? of course, we all have! The explanation lies in that the refresh rate of the television screen ( 480 lines of 640 pixels of color, refreshed at a rate of 29.97 times per second ) causes our eyes to become fixated not on the actual content of the show, but instead on the movement of the lines of resolution on the screen. All of this is to say, that sometimes we don't really know what it is that we are watching, or soaking in. Of course all of us here have the power to make our own decisions and judgements in life, but it's so much easier to let others do it for us. I'm not a big fan of the "song of the south" for the same reasons stated above. It is dehumanizing and safe to say an inaccurate depiction of the nature of slavery. I am also not a big fan of censorship either, but it is important to consider carefully the possible consequences of your actions, and I think that if they are not sincerely doing this now, Disney should consider it. They didn't do it when the film was originally released, so now is a good opportunity to make up for their prior mistake. Harry, just because it exists, doesn't mean you have to have it. That's very childish. There are a lot of people in this country that haven't been given the opportunity to have their own opinions in life, or don't really know how to exercise their ability to reason, or just don't like to. These people don't really need to watch some things. The sad part is that they outnumber reasonable people.
-
...in its unfortunate use of dated stereotypes. To this I say. "So what?". The movie, whatever its faults, is an existing work of art that the public should be allowed to view if they wish. Comparing this, awkward but well-meaning, childrens film to hate propaganda is completly ridiculous. This is a good example (albeit a minor one) of emotional reaction supplanting reasoned discourse in the discussion of race in North America. Maya Angelou is entitled to her (comletely understandable)
reaction to this film, but as an artist, to call for the boycotting of a creative work is a gross hypocrisy. -
I got into a heated debate on the Disney newsgroup a few years ago on this topic. I'm pretty much over my righteous indignation now. Still...As a black person, I'm fine with Disney not rereleasing this movie. I saw it as a child with my Mom, and I remember her not enjoying it at all. (This was back in ye olden days when Disney put the movies in theaters every few years.) I think I focused on the cartoons, couldn't tell you what the live action people did, but I certainly wasn't warped or demeaned by what I saw. Again, since I haven't seen it in 25 years, I'd have to take the word of people posting that it "isn't racist," but I don't think anyone can deny that its features stereotypes that we, as Americans, should move beyond.
I did flinch a bit at some poster's take on history though. To stoutly claim that some slaves were happy just makes my skin crawl. I'm sure the poster didn't mean it, but it sounded uncomfortably like....I don't know, it just sounded wrong. Did many black stay on the plantations where they had been owned? Yes. Were a few of the landowners honest and respectable? Probably. But I think some more reading on the history is due before we get all nostaligic and mushy and convice ourselves that things weren't all that bad back then.
I think it's sad that so Harry thinks that a movie taught him more about race relations and not being racist than, I dunno, his PARENTS and FAMILY and SCHOOL and own INNER MORALS, but that's his life, God bless him.
Something surely on Disney's mind is that it has not had a movie with black characters featured...since SotS. If it were to rerelease it, it certainly wouldn't get any points for righting a past omission. Still, Disney has weathered the Southern Baptist boycott for years now, so it's also certainly not quailing in fear of losing the back dollar or being excoriated in the press.
As far as censorship, I think people are forgetting what it is. If the government said the film cannot be shown, that's censorship. Disney is making a decision of what to do with its own property. No-one is really, really missing out on the answer to life, the universe and world brotherhood by not seeing this movie after all. (It can't be THAT good) When Disney deicides it can weather the protests and still make a mint off it, the movie will be back in stores, you can count on it. Then we'll get a round of media frenzy, the movie will sell well, be pulled for a few years, and we can all wait for the merry-go-round to begin again.
As far as general censorship in schools, I would never advocate pulling Huckleberry Finn, I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings, Catcher in the Rye, or any of the many classics people get in a snit over. (and apparently To Kill A Mockingbird is in danger in some schools now) The problem is the teaching these books, not the subjects. Most teachers do in well, but there are some staggering dunderheads who just don't get it.
All that said, I still would prefer Song of the South to stay in the vaults, but you know what? I can live with it if it does. We got bigger problems on the social scale. This is a blip. No matter whether it comes back out or not, the Republic will survive. -
Man, this is my first time posting here. I have never seen SOS but have no doubt that some of the material may be racially offensive by today
-
First off, Song Of The South was one of my favorite Disney flicks when I was a kid. Even living in the South, we didn't think about the slave aspect. The movie was first shown to me by an all black congregation at a church my father was minister for. THe ladies told me that many of these stories were stories they had grown up with. They were proud of sharing their cultural heritage with me, despite the horrors of slavery that had taken place during that time.
Secondly, those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Slavery was a horrible thing that demeaned all involved. It is not something that we should ever see again. However, if our children don't hear about it until high school history, they really aren't going to be armed against it as they should. If you feel it necessary to drag slavery into Song Of The South, make it mean something - the way reading Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer did for me. Use it as a starting point to speak to your children about slavery. Hiding it from them - and them from it - doesn't help them at all.
Finally, Harry is right. This movie is ultimately just that - a movie. Its not going to make someone run out and buy some slaves any more than Highlander made us all carry big swords under our trenchcoats and cut people's heads off or Silence Of The Lambs made people become serial killers. It just doesn't work that way. If you are that worried about how kids are going to react try this: WATCH THE MOVIE WITH THEM!! Explain what is right and what is wrong. Just ploping your kids in front of the TV without adult interaction is a bad idea anyway. Tell them why this porion of our history happened. Tell them why it can never happen again. Involve yourselves in the movies and TV that your children watch. -
More episodes of "Amos And Andy" survive than people might think! Try out http://www.angelfire.com/wv/jefros/aa.html He has a very full selection dating back to the 20's!
-
After reading some of these posts, I have come to a conclusion. America is a little to liberal for it's own good. We have become so afraid to talk about certain issues (RACE, for one), for the sake of political correctness, that on those rare occassions when it IS spoken about, most of what's said is downright ignorant. Having said that, I will reassert the fact that as an African American, I think it SHOULD be re-released, if just for educational purposes. I think censorship in any form, is WRONG. Though, in the case of that book "THE HITMAN" I could make an arguement (there are ALWAYS EXCEPTIONS), but I digress. I MUST make a few things clear...The idea of the "happy slave" is not limited to enslaved Africans, in the U.S. Think Holocaust, and jewish women benefiting from their "relations" with ss soldiers. Or for a more modern twist, think abused woman, remaining in a relationship with a man who beats her. And then ask yourself how you would feel if THAT were portrayed in a movie, for children. How would you feel if a jewish woman were depicted as grinning and singing about the ss soldier who has taken care of her? How would you feel about a woman with a black eye, singing happily about her situation as if there were a cartoon blue bird were on her shoulder? After all, there were people in the situations WHO WERE happy, as some of you have argued in the case of Song of the South. As I said earlier, before you go flying off the handle, I DO believe it should be re-released, no matter, HOW MUCH the sight of a grinning slave makes me cringe.
I personally think it's just easier to give an informed opinion on something, when it strikes closer to home, that's why I added those analogies. Feel free to respond. -
and u also dont use capital letters just like me (and kd lang). BACK OFF MAN!!!! its like if i called my self All ThAmbs or User ID Andeed!. i taped over my version of sots years ago and BOY do i regret it. HARRY!!!! WHERE THE HELL(!!!!!!!!!!) IS YOUR FANTASIA/2000 REVIEW??? DUDE I HAVE SOME SERIOUS F2K TALK I NEED TO GET OUT OF MY SYSTEM!!!! WHERE IS IT!??????bAff with an 'A' for 'Attempt to use Anything similiar to my name and ill dead u good!!'. cool it, baff. as one of our hippy talkbacker so eloquently put it, increase the peace. dont forget the fantasia 2000 review, harry. u do not want to have happen to u, what is going to happen to taht so called 'biff' character. say bye, bye biff!! bAff...
-
After plowing through the comments on SOTS, I'm not sure I have anything new to say, but maybe a synthesis of others' points. One of the most important things to consider in this debate is the audience for whom SOTS is intended. Quite obviously, most of the posters here are adults and, as adults, they have already formed their own opinions of race relations in this country--from the patently racist to kneejerk PC--and SOTS can have little dramatic impact on those attitudes. But as someone already pointed out, we get most of our programming on this issue from parents, schools, friends, and religion--that is, from influences which are strongest when we are children. On the other hand, as yet another person pointed out, children today spend a great deal of time in front of the tube and parents don't generally filter what kind of crap their kids watch (Pokemon is proof of that). Which means that children today *are* forming many of their opinions based on what they watch. Is SOTS something we want children, many of whom, at the age of 3 to 10 will not have the advantage of *any* sense of race history, to be watching without any comment on the context of the film. Did slaves stay with their masters? Of course they did. If you have been trained your entire life to serve someone, if that is your only sense of identity, if the choice is staying in an environment which is abusive but whose dangers are familiar versus going out into a world where you are a walking target for every confederate with a grudge, what would you do? Many of us would have stayed. But a child cannot yet recognize any of these issues or the others that shaped either the post-Civil War era or the mid-20th century racism which spawned the film. Those who are comparing SOTS to Gone with the Wind, Huck Finn, Catcher in the Rye etc. are missing this point. None of these are or ever were intended for children. A few are taught in high school (whether they should be is to me, as a teacher, more a matter of whether they are taught effectively) but at fourteen, many of these students have the tools to see at least some of the racism. What is perhaps more problematic in releasing SOTS is the lack of positive and useful role models for black children themselves. If SOTS were released into a film market which offered black children a wide range of potential role models (ranging from the saintlike to the sinful) then one negative stereotype might not be important. But as most blacks in this country will tell you, for every one film that offers a positive or even realistic view of black people, there are two hundred who portray blacks as criminal, unintelligent, violent, angry, or otherwise maladjusted. How can we justify providing one more stereotyped figure on which at least some portion of their egos will be based. It's all well and good for us adults to say "I can see it for what is it is," but we are not the primary Disney audience. So the question, it seems, is how to make the film available to the adults who can understand what underlies the movie (or can make the adult decision not to care about the realities of black existence in this country) without passing it on, unfiltered, to children who may come to accept the slave/master paradigm (with all its constituent arguments about the nature of black or white people) without question. A parental advisory is a good idea. Perhaps even re-rating the film (if films can be demoted from R to PG or G over time, why not work the other way on occasion as well?) might work. People seem to be resisting the idea of protests and outrage over a re-release, but it may be a good thing in disguise. If Maya and others are protesting, if they are getting their viewpoint out there, if they are making valid points about the past and current state of race relations in this country, then maybe parents will put a little more thought into plunking their children down in front of this film and walking away. Perhaps *that* is the very best outcome.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 419 total posts 209 posts
- WTF HOLLYWOOD: SOLARBABIES -- 131 total posts 129 posts
- Herc’s Seen Tonight’s Return Of THE WALKING DEAD!! Discuss Also DOWNTON ABBEY, FEAR FACTOR, PAN AM, ONCE, SIMPSONS, DYNAMITE, LUCK, SHAMELESS, BAIT CAR, THE GRAMMYS And More!! Sunday Is Sweeps Day 11!! -- 123 total posts 122 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 124 total posts 58 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 191 total posts 47 posts
- Avid Comic Reader Hercules Does Battle With Tedium During Kevin Smith’s COMIC BOOK MEN! -- 43 total posts 43 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 60 total posts 42 posts
- I am The Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day! No, I’m the Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day! -- 27 total posts 27 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 506 total posts 26 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 77 total posts 24 posts