Jump to content

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

Does anyone find SONG OF THE SOUTH (1946) offensive...?

Recommended Posts

One member is following this topic, so I am sure he has read every post in the thread! LOL

 

As we move forward, I would like to quote more users from the IMDB (and other sources) who do not find SONG OF THE SOUTH offensive. I think we can continue to make a case that this beloved classic motion picture is mostly harmless entertainment...

 

I also want to ask people why, if the NAACP (or whatever group it was at the time) was objecting to the adapting of Harris' well-known stories, did Disney ignore them and press forward? Plus, why didn't black Americans who objected to the Uncle Remus stories not try to get Harris' writings banned? Why go after the movie instead of the book? Is there a vendetta afoot against Disney? Wouldn't the original text(s) be more damaging? Because anyone, long after Disney, can come along and re-adapt them (without making them politically correct)...

 

Look at all the free (meaning they are in the public domain) writings by Joel Chandler Harris that anyone can make into a movie nowadays:

 

 

I still don't understand the point of posting opinions from those,  like myself,  that view SOTS as 'harmless'.    To me this makes it look like a contest.  i.e. who can find the most opinions one way or the other.    Everyone knows there are those that find the film harmless and those that find it offensive (to some degree).    So I don't see the value in reading more opinions that related to that.  An opinion poll of blacks by age group would be interesting.  

 

As for why go after the movie;  To me the answer there is very simple;  movies are a visual media.   Books take a lot more time and effort to read and digest.   So movies are targeted before books because they are easier targets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for why go after the movie;  To me the answer there is very simple;  movies are a visual media.   Books take a lot more time and effort to read and digest.   So movies are targeted before books because they are easier targets.

 

And Disney movies are specifically produced for, and marketed to, children. Children are impressionable. So Disney product receives a different kind of scrutiny than that of other companies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't understand the point of posting opinions from those,  like myself,  that view SOTS as 'harmless'.    To me this makes it look like a contest.  i.e. who can find the most opinions one way or the other.    Everyone knows there are those that find the film harmless and those that find it offensive (to some degree).    So I don't see the value in reading more opinions that related to that.  An opinion poll of blacks by age group would be interesting.  

 

As for why go after the movie;  To me the answer there is very simple;  movies are a visual media.   Books take a lot more time and effort to read and digest.   So movies are targeted before books because they are easier targets.

I agree that films may seem like easier targets. But to me, the real issue should be the source material, for those who are arguing against the filmization of these stories. Disney didn't just invent these tales out of thin air.

 

I think posting opinions from other sources might bring up points that people may not have considered previously. It is not a contest or a way to strong-arm others but to look at the sides of the issue more thoroughly. I think you would be 'for' that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't aware there'd been any outcry prior to that - or of any ongoing criticism of Harris and his writings. 

I think you may be misinterpreting me. I did not say Harris' writings were under scrutiny prior to the making of the film. In fact, his stories were very popular, which probably helped convince Disney there was an audience for the movie. But my point is that Disney and his animators may be the easy target here. I would think that if someone objected strongly to Uncle Remus on film, they would have to look back at the original source material and object to that, too. That's all I'm saying. I am not saying people should burn Harris' writings or ban them-- but unless Disney completely changed the stories (which I don't think he did), then the fault (for those who find fault in the stories) should be placed on Harris (or those who told the stories to Harris and inspired him to write them down) as well as Disney for updating them. Am I making sense here? Or are we going round and round in circles again? LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you may be misinterpreting me. I did not say Harris' writings were under scrutiny prior to the making of the film. In fact, his stories were very popular, which probably helped convince Disney there was an audience for the movie. But my point is that Disney and his animators may be the easy target here. I would think that if someone objected strongly to Uncle Remus on film, they would have to look back at the original source material and object to that, too. That's all I'm saying. I am not saying people should burn Harris' writings or ban them-- but unless Disney completely changed the stories (which I don't think he did), then the fault (for those who find fault in the stories) should be placed on Harris (or those who told the stories to Harris and inspired him to write them down) as well as Disney for updating them. Am I making sense here? Or are we going round and round in circles again? LOL

 

I agree that the source material should be the target for those looking for offensive material.   e.g. Gone with the Wind.   The movie is just a reflection of the book.    So when I criticize GWTW as presenting a santized view of slavery,  I'm referring to the book and not the movie.   

 

Of course,  as we have discussed,  the makers of movies have creative license.   This allows them to alter the movie as they wish.  A remake of GWTW would likely be different than the one made in 1938 \ 39 for the 'PC' reasons we have been discussing.

 

As for 'fault';   Well those looking to be offended (as you know some make their living off of this),   will fault both parties.  Harris for writing the books and inventing the characters and Disney for making a film based on the book.      But for everyday folks,  I assume they mainly fault the content they are directly experiencing (the book if they are reading that,  and the movie if they are watching that).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that the source material should be the target for those looking for offensive material.   e.g. Gone with the Wind.   The movie is just a reflection of the book.    So when I criticize GWTW as presenting a santized view of slavery,  I'm referring to the book and not the movie.   

 

Of course,  as we have discussed,  the makers of movies have creative license.   This allows them to alter the movie as they wish.  A remake of GWTW would likely be different than the one made in 1938 \ 39 for the 'PC' reasons we have been discussing.

 

As for 'fault';   Well those looking to be offended (as you know some make their living off of this),   will fault both parties.  Harris for writing the books and inventing the characters and Disney for making a film based on the book.      But for everyday folks,  I assume they mainly fault the content they are directly experiencing (the book if they are reading that,  and the movie if they are watching that).

Good post. I have nothing more to add to this part of the discussion...I think you summed it up correctly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As we move forward, I would like to quote more users from the IMDB (and other sources) who do not find SONG OF THE SOUTH offensive. I think we can continue to make a case that this beloved classic motion picture is mostly harmless entertainment...

 

 

Hey, you should be grateful I haven't gone after Disney's animated version of "The Jungle Book." It could launch a spinoff of this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...A remake of GWTW would likely be different than the one made in 1938 \ 39 for the 'PC' reasons we have been discussing.

 

 

Well, all I can say here is that IF this comes about, let us ALL hope that THIS time they take a page out of Miss Burnett's book and they LEAVE that curtain rod in Scarlett's dress when she visits Rhett in jail.

 

(...can I get a "Hallelujah " here, folks?!!!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, you should be grateful I haven't gone after Disney's animated version of "The Jungle Book." It could launch a spinoff of this thread.

 

I recommend you do.   The Jungle Book was my favorite movie as a kid.   I would be interested in comments from those that that offensive with the film (as long as one was specific as it relates to certain scenes and \ or characters).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recommend you do.   The Jungle Book was my favorite movie as a kid.   I would be interested in comments from those that that offensive with the film (as long as one was specific as it relates to certain scenes and \ or characters).

 

Or Disney's "Mary Poppins," specifically the scene in which Admiral Boom (Reginald Owen) has a South Africa flashback. He fires at the soot-covered chimney sweeps because he believes they are hostile Hottentots.

 

 

 

 

And you wonder what makes the Hottentots so hot. It's almost as offensive as Dick Van Dyke's Cockney accent. But not as offensive as the crows in Disney's "Dumbo."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...And you wonder what makes the Hottentots so hot.

 

Nah, I already know...."KERR-age"!!!

 

(...some furry dude with an unruly tail and a New York accent told me the answer to this when I was a kid)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah, I already know...."KERR-age"!!!

 

(...some furry dude with an unruly tail and a New York accent told me the answer to this when I was a kid)

 

You can say that again!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you may be misinterpreting me. I did not say Harris' writings were under scrutiny prior to the making of the film.

 

You said:

 

why didn't black Americans who objected to the Uncle Remus stories not try to get Harris' writings banned? Why go after the movie instead of the book? Is there a vendetta afoot against Disney?

 

You clearly stated that there were African-Americans who had a problem with the Uncle Remus stories. Again I'll ask, where'd you hear that? Just like when I asked where'd you hear that Disney pressed ahead with production against the complaints of "black" people (which I believe you've since edited) and you didn't answer then either.

 

I know the Disney movie garnered some negative reaction from African-Americans, but your assertion that they also had a previous problem with Harris' stories is news to me. Or that they were complaining about the making of the movie even before the movie premiered. Also news to me.

 

There's no problem with me or anyone else misinterpreting your posts. They're so wriggly, so subject to later alteration, and so all over the map in terms of changing the direction of the conversation, there's really no "interpreting" to be done at all. It would be nice if you were consistent and willing to answer simple questions with simple answers, but pretending that other members misunderstand what you say is what we get instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that the source material should be the target for those looking for offensive material. 

 

The day after 'Song of the South' premiered, NAACP secretary Walter White wrote:

 

"the production helps to perpetuate a dangerously glorified picture of slavery. Making use of the beautiful Uncle Remus folklore, 'Song of the South' unfortunately gives the impression of an idyllic master-slave relationship which is a distortion of the facts."

 

It would appear that the source material was not what was troubling (actually referred to as "beautiful Uncle Remus folklore"). It was the movie that Disney made that was troubling.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You said:

 

why didn't black Americans who objected to the Uncle Remus stories not try to get Harris' writings banned? Why go after the movie instead of the book? Is there a vendetta afoot against Disney?

 

You clearly stated that there were African-Americans who had a problem with the Uncle Remus stories. Again I'll ask, where'd you hear that? Just like when I asked where'd you hear that Disney pressed ahead with production against the complaints of "black" people (which I believe you've since edited) and you didn't answer then either.

 

I know the Disney movie garnered some negative reaction from African-Americans, but your assertion that they also had a previous problem with Harris' stories is news to me. Or that they were complaining about the making of the movie even before the movie premiered. Also news to me.

 

There's no problem with me or anyone else misinterpreting your posts. They're so wriggly, so subject to later alteration, and so all over the map in terms of changing the direction of the conversation, there's really no "interpreting" to be done at all. It would be nice if you were consistent and willing to answer simple questions with simple answers, but pretending that other members misunderstand what you say is what we get instead.

No more comments on this point, darkblue. You are misconstruing everything I say (apparently on purpose) and you are peppering your replies with confrontational words. I reserve the right to avoid protracted arguments with you. Moving on...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No more comments on this point, darkblue. You are misconstruing everything I say (apparently on purpose) and you are peppering your replies with confrontational words. I reserve the right to avoid protracted arguments with you. Moving on...

 

Well, it's clear that you can't or won't answer the question I asked. I have no other option than to believe you made it all up in an effort to stimulate a false discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strike Throughs instead of direct responses.... hmmm

 

I guess you can't respond to people's questions after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

post-42209-0-34261700-1414039036_thumb.jpg

 

    Just had to post a piccy of the Redd Foxx LP I mentioned a page or so back.  :D

 

     And don't be a sad panda, darkblue.  Let John Elroy Sanford give you some 'blue' cheer!

 

      

    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread has devolved into something way off of the original topic and into nothing more than personal attacks.  Shutting this down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

© 2019 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
×
×
  • Create New...