Gone With the Wind: Margaret Mitchell's Cautionary Tale to the south.

[Bethluvsfilms]

10 minutes ago, Dargo said:

LOL

A little.

BUT, I'll feel even BETTER when I see some of the folks around here acknowledge the validity of my little motorcycle movie analogy to this whole GWTW thing.

(...and why I used it to press my point)

I agree with what you said about EASY RIDER.

Fonda and Hopper's characters (SPOILER ALERT) certainly did NOT deserve to be blown away like they were simply because they weren't part of the Establishment. Nor did George Hanson (Jack Nicholson) deserved to be beaten to death for absolutely no good reason.

[slaytonf]

 

Dargo said:

I'll feel even BETTER when I see some of the folks around here acknowledge the validity of my little motorcycle movie analogy

Here's a vote for validation!

[TomJH]

I'm really sorry that they couldn't have had motorcycles in Gone With the Wind.

Mammy could have scooted around Tara playing your basic plantation Bad ****.

"Hey, Mammy," Prissy or Poke might ask her, "what are you rebelling against?'

"Whadda ya got?" Mammy would reply, "Now you get that washin' done, you shiftless bunch 'fore I tell Miss Scarlett on you!"

I can envision Rhett arriving at Tara with a horse drawn buggy and Mammy scooting by him on her bike shouting, "I'm warning the house you's on the way, you no good white trash!"

Edited June 16 by TCMModerator1
Edited for Language

[Dargo]

9 hours ago, TomJH said:

I'm really sorry that they couldn't have had motorcycles in Gone With the Wind.

Mammy could have scooted around Tara playing your basic plantation Bad ****.

"Hey, Mammy," Prissy or Poke might ask her, "what are you rebelling against?'

"Whadda ya got?" Mammy would reply, "Now you get that washin' done, you shiftless bunch 'fore I tell Miss Scarlett on you!"

I can envision Rhett arriving at Tara with a horse drawn buggy and Mammy scooting by him her bike shouting, "I'm warning the house you's on the way, you no good white trash!"

LOL

I love it Tom, but I think in this case you've forgotten to write one more additional key scene...

"So Mammy, what is it you want?"

-"Mr. Rhett, we wanna be free! FREE to ride our machines without bein' hassled by The Klan!"

(...and I'll bet Hattie could've delivered that line a hell of a lot better and more believably than Peter Fonda ever did in that lousy American-International biker flick, dude!) 

Edited June 16 by TCMModerator1
Edited Quote for Language

[TheCid]

21 hours ago, Dargo said:

Okay, I can resist the following no longer here, folks,

As an avid and (reasonably) law-abiding motorcyclist for over 50 years now, I'm afraid I'm now going to have to insist that every time TCM shows The Wild One and/or any of those gawdawful American-International biker flicks from the 1960's starring Peter Fonda, Bruce Dern or Jack Nicholson, that TCM will from now on have to EITHER place a printed disclaimer on screen BEFORE the movie starts, OR have either Ben or Eddie or Alicia or Dave or Jacqueline here explain to the nice folks out there in television land that ONLY a VERY small percentage of motorcyclists are like THOSE freakin' idiots you're about to see!!!

LOL

And of course, JUST in order to place this kind'a thing into more of a "correct historical perspective" for any and all people REAGARDLESS of race, color or creed OR their history or lack thereof of riding a motorcycle, and who apparently EITHER take what they see in a freakin' Hollywood movie as "gospel" OR who somehow seem unable to understand the concept of placing what they see portrayed WITHIN some old freakin' Hollywood movie into the context of the era that it was produced.

(...there, I've said it)

 

I watched Bright Leaf this afternoon, which was followed by Parrish.

Where were the disclaimers about the evils of smoking tobacco?  Where were the wraparounds with health experts or others pointing out that it was a different time when those movies were made?

You can see my similar comments on God's Little Acre thread.

[Dargo]

5 minutes ago, TheCid said:

I watched Bright Leaf this afternoon, which was followed by Parrish.

Where were the disclaimers about the evils of smoking tobacco?  Where were the wraparounds with health experts or others pointing out that it was a different time when those movies were made?

Actually Cid, when it comes Bright Leaf, I think a better and more apropos disclaimer might be the following...

"Warning: You are about to watch a movie where Gary Cooper plays a real SOB. I know, ain't THAT unusual!"

[Bethluvsfilms]

12 minutes ago, Dargo said:

Actually Cid, when it comes Bright Leaf, I think a better and more apropos disclaimer might be the following...

"Warning: You are about to watch a movie where Gary Cooper plays a real SOB. I know, ain't THAT unusual!"

You could probably use the same disclaimer for Henry Fonda in ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST!

[Vautrin]

Mammy, if I ever see you riding one of those cotton burners again, I'll tan your hide.

[TheCid]

26 minutes ago, Vautrin said:

Mammy, if I ever see you riding one of those cotton burners again, I'll tan your hide.

So, that's what they use cotton seed oil for.

[Vautrin]

1 hour ago, TheCid said:

So, that's what they use cotton seed oil for.

The New South had to start somewhere.

[slaytonf]

3 hours ago, TheCid said:

Where were the disclaimers about the evils of smoking tobacco? 

So the evils of racism and institutional murder are equal to the evils of tobacco smoking. . . .

[slaytonf]

2 hours ago, Vautrin said:

Mammy, if I ever see you riding one of those cotton burners again, I'll tan your hide.

Sigh.  Anything to keep a thread going, I guess.

[Dargo]

Quote

Edited 3 hours ago by TCMModerator1
Edited Quote for Language

This because Tom had the "bad manners " to dare type "Bad (and then another word for "posterior" or "butt") and which I then quoted.

LOOK MODERATOR, what the HELL have you always had against that word anyway, HUH?!!!

(...look dude or madam, allow me to enlighten you here...THAT word is used ALL the freakin' TIME in conversation, and YEAH, even IN polite circles and in polite conversation...so GET OVER IT already, dude or madam, PLEASE, as the USE of it will or does in NO way "lower the tenor of discourse")

 

[Dargo]

There ya go, slayton.

(...how was THAT for "keeping your thread goin'" here, HUH?!) 

LOL

[slaytonf]

Go ahead.  I'll take any post.

[Dargo]

3 minutes ago, slaytonf said:

Go ahead.  I'll take any post.

Yeah, you're easy.

(...but then again I already knew that)  

[slaytonf]

Eh, what's the use?

[Vautrin]

5 hours ago, slaytonf said:

Sigh.  Anything to keep a thread going, I guess.

We must always remember the long gone time of brave, tattooed, chain wielding hog riders and their old

ladies who demurely let them pull a train. Now they are gone with the exhaust fumes, never to return.

Vrooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooom

[TheCid]

13 hours ago, slaytonf said:

So the evils of racism and institutional murder are equal to the evils of tobacco smoking. . . .

No, but the movies depict tobacco use as a good thing.  So a disclaimer or wraparound is necessary.  

The point is if we start requiring disclaimers and wraparounds for one issue, we need to have them for all issues.   Just as we need them for God's Little Acre, Tobacco Road and a multitude of others.

[sewhite2000]

3 hours ago, TheCid said:

The point is if we start requiring disclaimers and wraparounds for one issue, we need to have them for all issues.   Just as we need them for God's Little Acre, Tobacco Road and a multitude of others.

I don't know we HAVE to have them. I see a lot of people saying this on here, but I don't understand the logic. Enough of the populace seems to want one for Gone With the Wind right now, because it's getting a lot of light on it, for multiple reasons. It doesn't logically follow that we MUST then do them for all movies anyone might potentially find offensive.

[TheCid]

1 hour ago, sewhite2000 said:

I don't know we HAVE to have them. I see a lot of people saying this on here, but I don't understand the logic. Enough of the populace seems to want one for Gone With the Wind right now, because it's getting a lot of light on it, for multiple reasons. It doesn't logically follow that we MUST then do them for all movies anyone might potentially find offensive.

What is so different about GWTW as opposed to many, many other movies?  Nothing.   So, why is it the only movie in last hundred years that has to be handled in this manner?   Publicity.

[Dargo]

17 minutes ago, TheCid said:

What is so different about GWTW as opposed to many, many other movies?  Nothing.   So, why is it the only movie in last hundred years that has to be handled in this manner?   Publicity.

Well Cid, maybe this whole GWTW thing wouldn't have happened OR at least have come to a head at the moment like it has, IF there weren't cops who don't know how to handle an arrest without placing their damn knee on some guy's throat for nine freakin' minutes.

Ever think about THAT???

(...and you know how so many people love to "bundle" things in America today, don't ya?!...it makes it real simple for 'em)

[TheCid]

18 minutes ago, Dargo said:

Well Cid, maybe this whole GWTW thing wouldn't have happened OR at least have come to a head at the moment like it has, IF there weren't cops who don't know how to handle an arrest without placing their damn knee on some guy's throat for nine freakin' minutes.

Ever think about THAT???

(...and you know how so many people love to "bundle" things in America today, don't ya?!...it makes it real simple for 'em)

Not sure I have your point correct, but anyway I agree that the GWTW issue would not have come to a head without the criminal actions of the police officer it above case and others.

My problem is why is GWTW be singled out as the worst, most racist, most horrible movie ever made.  And therefore deserving of special actions such as censorship, lengthy wraparounds, "contextualization" from a limited viewpoint, etc.

[Dargo]

8 minutes ago, TheCid said:

Not sure I have your point correct, but anyway I agree that the GWTW issue would not have come to a head without the criminal actions of the police officer it above case and others.

My problem is why is GWTW be singled out as the worst, most racist, most horrible movie ever made.  And therefore deserving of special actions such as censorship, lengthy wraparounds, "contextualization" from a limited viewpoint, etc.

Because of GWTW's high profile, and it being a movie that probably many more Americans have either seen or at the minimum have heard about than almost any other Hollywood movie ever released. That's why! Remember, it is often said that adjusted for inflation it's STILL the number one box office winner Tinsel Town ever made. And, the higher the profile, the easier the target.

(...or at least I'll BET that that's the reason, anyway)

[TheCid]

1 minute ago, Dargo said:

Because of GWTW's high profile, and it being a movie that probably many more Americans have either seen or at the minimum have heard about than almost any other Hollywood movie ever released. That's why! Remember, it is often said that adjusted for inflation it's STILL the number one box office winner Tinsel Town ever made.

(...or at least I'll BET that that's the reason, anyway)

I just wonder if HBOMax have left it alone, there would not have been all this controversy.