Jump to content

 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
JeanneCrain

Gone with the Wind…GONE!

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, TopBilled said:

Because the jig's up.

Um ... you might want to rephrase that

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TheCid said:

You are misinterpreting my intentions.  I am pointing out the logical results of censoring GWTW or requiring wraparounds to explain what should be obvious.  If it applies to this movie, it must naturally apply to all that some may find offensive.

TopBilled is engaging in what is known as "kafkatrapping".

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boy, I missed a lot in 8 hours. lol.

Here is a simple solution, just make a disclaimer that goes with the TCM logo that states "these films were made in a different age and may be offensive  at times to EVERYONE"

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, cigarjoe said:

Boy, I missed a lot in 8 hours. lol.

Here is a simple solution, just make a disclaimer that goes with the TCM logo that states "these films were made in a different age and may be offensive  at times to EVERYONE"

 

Sounds reasonable to me but again, I'm not an activist.     I highly doubt that would be good enough to satisfy most activist.   I.e.  based on the two article I read some  want such films to always be shown with historical-context-commentary or for the films to NOT be shown,  period.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Though I think it's a shame -- a crime, even -- that they're pulling Gone with the Wind, I've never thought it to be a great movie, though it has its moments.  My favorite films of 1939 is The Light that Failed, based on the Kipling story. Now that's a great film, but it is not a movie for the "woke!"

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HBO's action is only temporary.  It's not censorship in the case of GWTW.  They haven't stated they'll be modifying the film's content in any way and have stated it will return.  From all appearances, they're just going to add some type of disclaimer or commentary it.

GWTW's problem (like Song of the South) is that it glorifies or romanticizes the South's plantation and slavery system, and gives the impression that "it wasn't all that bad."  It's so far from the truth it would be laughable if it weren't so tragic.  Watch Roots to get a better depiction of the way it really was.

I guess I don't understand the objection to putting a film in its historical context (of when it was made).   If you don't want to watch an intro to the film, you can skip over it (it's a streaming service, so your fast-forward button will work).  Not all viewers will be aware that things were really that different (in some ways) in this and other countries when these films were made (and that it was wrong).    Many kids today are not learning about the entire slavery issue and how embedded it was in this country's founding and culture up to the Civil War, so these types of context help them understand history - not just the Civil War/slavery history, but the history of US culture when the film was made, and that this country regularly denigrated people of color as either second-class citizens or less than human in its mass media of that era. 

BBC has started doing the same with some of their archived programming available on their iPlayer and Britbox platforms.   Some titles carry a disclaimer notice in the directory.  They've also pulled some episodes outright (for example, an infamous 1981 episode "Roots?"  of Are You Being Served,  where most of the cast was in blackface in a minstrel show at the end of the episode is generally not available any longer).  They also recently pulled the entire Little Britain catalog (from just 20 years ago), as has Netflix, that have characters in blackface, etc.

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-52983319

Regarding the Godfather series, Italian-Americans have been protesting those films from the beginning, even during production.  

From 1971:

https://www.nytimes.com/1971/03/20/archives/-godfather-film-wont-mention-mafia-protest-gets-mafia-reference-out.html

From 2019:

https://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/park-ridge/ct-prh-godfather-protest-tl-0110-story.html

And I don't agree that these films should never see the light of day again.  I think they need their proper context.  If we erase them - pretend they never existed -  we'll never learn from mistakes of the past.  Part of viewing these films is to understand why they are wrong in their depictions.  But in order to do that, they have to be put in their proper context.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, txfilmfan said:

Watch Roots to get a better depiction of the way it really was.

I remember watching that new with the rest of the world then.  ALEX HALEY was of course sued, settled, and admitted plagiarism from the novel The African... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's hard to tell how much of various 'historical productions' is true -- there's always dramatic license taken isn't there? 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Allhallowsday said:

I remember watching that new with the rest of the world then.  ALEX HALEY was of course sued, settled, and admitted plagiarism from the novel The African... 

It's true that Haley copied passages of The African, but it doesn't take away from the fact that Roots is a more accurate portrayal of slavery and the plantation system than GWTW.  To my knowledge, there's not been a film or TV movie made using The African as its source.

2 minutes ago, Mr. Gorman said:

It's hard to tell how much of various 'historical productions' is true -- there's always dramatic license taken isn't there? 

 

 

No doubt.  But there's no doubt that slavery was (is) a cruel, inhumane, unjust institution and that GWTW doesn't even begin to properly address it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, txfilmfan said:

It's true that Haley copied passages of The African, but it doesn't take away from the fact that Roots is a more accurate portrayal of slavery and the plantation system than GWTW.

I expect that you're correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, txfilmfan said:

No doubt.  But there's no doubt that slavery was (is) a cruel, inhumane, unjust institution and that GWTW doesn't even begin to properly address it.

Maybe they should bookend GWTW with Mandingo and Drum in all future showings. 🤪

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, lavenderblue19 said:

You're only partially correct. the statue was beheaded once before. They found his head and put him back together again. Italians are proud of Columbus, there have been parades on Columbus Day, Didn't you watch that episode on The Sopranos LOL

I've been reading that it has been vandalized a few times over the years. I don't recall a previous beheading, but

that wouldn't be surprising. I haven't seen The Sopranos in years. I'm sure Italian-Americans had a significant

part in making Columbus Day a holiday. They should have picked a different person. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Vautrin said:

They should have picked a different person. 

I sure they didn't know about the genocide back then. In school we just learned about the discovery of America then about the various other explorers until Jamestown and Plymouth. Nobody was teaching the various genocidal history of the Native Americans back then.

INDIGENOUS CALIFORNIA INDIAN CULTURAL FINE ART POSTERS Kumeyaay ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GONE WITH THE WIND, as far as I can tell, was not meant to be a history lesson about slavery.  It was meant to be a Civil War soap opera.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cigarjoe said:

I sure they didn't know about the genocide back then. In school we just learned about the discovery of America then about the various other explorers until Jamestown and Plymouth. Nobody was teaching the various genocidal history of the Native Americans back then.

INDIGENOUS CALIFORNIA INDIAN CULTURAL FINE ART POSTERS Kumeyaay ...

Yes, that's very true. Columbus was a hero and his mass murder was not mentioned and it was likely that

only some professional historians knew about the other side of Columbus. But now that that other side

is better known and ignorance is no longer a reason to celebrate Columbus, he is still celebrated, though

to a lesser degree. I've always found it amusing that Columbus never set foot in what is now the United

States. I like that Homeland Security visual. I've seen it on tee shirts too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's more Mannsplaining than Kafkatrapping.     :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, TopBilled said:

But some people are fighting the notion of wraparounds. They want it to be seen casually and without warning. Which of course is highly irresponsible, in my opinion.

I think many of us want these films to be shown w/o "warning" wraparounds because we're adults who can decide for ourselves whether or not a film contains objectional themes or material.  Unlike you, we don't need Whoopi Goldberg "educating" us on what's good and what's bad.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://archive.org/details/gonewiththewind1939bluray

https://www.vulture.com/article/gone-with-the-wind-and-cinematic-monuments-to-the-confederacy.html

https://www.vulture.com/article/the-absolutist-case-for-gone-with-the-wind.html

"Should you watch it? Only you can know that. Should you be able to watch it, even this week? Yes. That shouldn’t be the call of either a jittery corporation or an offended person or group. I’ve seen the argument that quasi-deplatforming Gone With the Wind is the equivalent of toppling and removing a Confederate statue. But as Angelica Bastién has explained in an elegantly argued 2017 essay, it’s a troubling comparison. Statues are not simply displayed; they’re meant to be looked up to, so the assumption of veneration is built in, and they’re in public spaces, where many people have no choice but to be confronted by the glorification of racism and oppression they represent. A streaming movie isn’t that; it exists but it does not impose itself, unless you think its very existence is an imposition."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, scsu1975 said:

Um ... you might want to rephrase that

Preferably to something not from Mel Brooks.

GONE WITH THE WIND, as far as I can tell, was not meant to be a history lesson about slavery.  It was meant to be a Civil War soap opera.   

I have no racism grudge with it--McDaniel is the most intelligent character in the story, as she should be--but some people can spend four hours detailing the dysfunctional First-World-problem relationships of a spoiled brat, and some people can't.

4 hours ago, txfilmfan said:

BBC has started doing the same with some of their archived programming available on their iPlayer and Britbox platforms.   Some titles carry a disclaimer notice in the directory.  They've also pulled some episodes outright (for example, an infamous 1981 episode "Roots?"  of Are You Being Served,  where most of the cast was in blackface in a minstrel show at the end of the episode is generally not available any longer). 

Although it's (ahem) still available on the DVD's.  And in the episode's case, was meant to be a parody of Britain's "The Black & White Minstrel Show", which has also never been seen in the US for obvious reasons.

As for HBOMax and GWTW, it'll be back--it's one of the Five Old Movies Warner think we still watch (studios now only circle the home-theater wagons around three or four, for franchise's sake)--and ten bucks says the explanatory "disclaimer" will sound an awful lot like the one they already put on the Bugs Bunny and Tom & Jerry cartoon boxsets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, jakeem said:

You forgot Elmer Fudd's  gun.

See the source image

When I saw this yesterday I thought folks were just being silly. But AT&T really did do this. Elmer Fudd is a hunter. Hunters use guns not scythes. How  do you depict the chaos of Yosemite Sam without him blasting his six guns?   Again, thank goodness for physical media, as I still have my Golden Collections of WB cartoons. I know this is not the "politics" forum, but the left couldn't be doing a better job of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory with what has been going on in the news the past few days. So maybe I'll wander over to the "Off Topic" forum and speak my piece there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Wayne said:

I think many of us want these films to be shown w/o "warning" wraparounds because we're adults who can decide for ourselves whether or not a film contains objectional themes or material.  Unlike you, we don't need Whoopi Goldberg "educating" us on what's good and what's bad.  

Of course there are people with different POV.     To me that isn't as relevant as what one does or does NOT do,  based on their POV.

E.g. would you boycott TCM IF they started to have these 'wraparounds'?      That is really at the heart of the question for the management of a content provider like TCM.

How many people with a given POV will NOT using their product?       Note that those that are offended have said they will boycott,   but generally people that disagree with the need for wraparounds will NOT  boycott.      Thus it should be easy to understand why management could concede and include wraparounds.

Again,    capitalism \ supply and demand.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

You misunderstood:   self-imposed censorship is when a private company decides to censor (not show,  edit),   a given work.    

The term self-imposed is added to 'censorship' to separate it from the common usage of the term,  that means government-imposed-censorship.

Therefore,  if TCM, HBO,  NBC etc..  were to decide to NOT show a film or only show a film with a historical-introduction,  that would be self-imposed.

The above is why I called self-imposed censorship,  capitalism.   

My interpretation (and I believe the correct one) of all of TB's early posts indicate that HE wants GWTW not shown or censored by having wraparounds.  As I said HE wants censorship.   This is not "self-censorship" by TCM, HBO, etc.

13 hours ago, Fedya said:

TopBilled is engaging in what is known as "kafkatrapping".

Had to look it up, but I believe you are correct.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, lavenderblue19 said:

The statue is in the North End, that's Boston's equivalent to Little Italy, that's why

That really doesn't explain much.  Like why, in the heat of the George Floyd protests is the destruction of a bust of Christopher Columbus deemed necessary?

Or why Boston Italians feel a bust of Columbus was important.  Oh, cuz he was ITALIAN!  Sure, but HOW is that significant to BOSTON Italians? 

Sepiatone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sepia I am responding to your post with an explanation, it is not an opinion one way or the other, it's just an explanation since you asked.  There are 10  states that have Columbus statues across the US not just Massachusetts. DC, Fla, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, NY, Ohio, Pennsylvania Virginia and Puerto Rico, besides statues in many other countries. This has been an on going situation of protesting Columbus statues for years. Protesters say Columbus was a symbol of white supremacy.  What's been said is that native people in areas that Columbus and other European explorers colonized were terrorized by them, that's why the destruction of these statues are going on now and part of the recent protests. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...