PDA

View Full Version : It's been 20 Years; release Song of the South
















Lincsong
02-22-2006, 08:48 PM
1986 was the last time that Walt Disney's film, Song of the South (1946) was released in the United States. I have the video of it that was sold in Britain. I feel like I have a piece of history. It is time that Disney quit being such sanctimonious hypocrites; release this on DVD and let the market determine whether or not it is viewable.:arated:

Weston
02-22-2006, 08:56 PM
I saw somewhere that it is going to see DVD release as-is, as a cultural artifact, with maybe a documentary "explaining" what is not so acceptable today.

Mycroft
02-22-2006, 08:59 PM
I saw somewhere that it is going to see DVD release as-is, as a cultural artifact, with maybe a documentary "explaining" what is not so acceptable today.

Then it isn't a Disney movie. I can see why they will not release it, it is kinda rasist in a way and is a blemish Disney dosn't want to bring up.

Weston
02-22-2006, 09:07 PM
Ahhh, but that was "Old Disney", which didn't want to admit Black Cauldron either. This is "Anything for a Buck" Disney. If they think there is money to be made, they'd reanimate Walt's corpse.

It'll see the light of day someday.

Lil' Info here:

http://dvd.ign.com/articles/576/576790p1.html

Lincsong
02-22-2006, 09:16 PM
Then it isn't a Disney movie. I can see why they will not release it, it is kinda rasist in a way and is a blemish Disney dosn't want to bring up.

What is "kinda racist in a way"? It is an Academy Award winning film. Gone With the Wind is racist in a way, Shirley Temple in The Littlest General is racist in a way, Santa Fe Trail is racist in a way. This film is not like Birth of a Nation which is a vulgarly racist movie.

Mycroft
02-22-2006, 09:21 PM
What is "kinda racist in a way"? It is an Academy Award winning film. Gone With the Wind is racist in a way, Shirley Temple in The Littlest General is racist in a way, Santa Fe Trail is racist in a way. This film is not like Birth of a Nation which is a vulgarly racist movie.

Well from what I have read it identifies African Americans as slaves, since the songs were from when the were enslaved (unfourchantly), and that it degrades them as a ethnic group.

Lincsong
02-22-2006, 09:35 PM
Well from what I have read it identifies African Americans as slaves, since the songs were from when the were enslaved (unfourchantly), and that it degrades them as a ethnic group.
Thank you for your opinion. The film did take place in the antebellum South. Actually it was post Civil War South. Prior to 1865 there were slaves from Africa in the South. This is all fact. No argument there. The Jews were also enslaved in Egypt before Moses led them out. Does this make Ten Commandments anti-Semitic? Yes, some of the songs in the movie were spiritual songs from the said group. (Just Sunday night I flipped on the the Cartoon Network and there was the cartoon Boondocks. Talk about degrading Blacks as an ethnic group. And this is on in Prime Time!) In fact this movie was based on short stories which were in turn based on stories that African Slaves brought from Africa. I don't think this film should be sanitized, politically corrected or cut. People who don't want to see it can simply not buy it. :icon_smil

jake_fink
02-22-2006, 09:41 PM
I think the problem that this film presents is that it is intended for an audience of children and children tend to be more impressionable than adults. I think it should be released; an added "explanation" is fine.

Mycroft
02-22-2006, 09:43 PM
Thank you for your opinion. The film did take place in the antebellum South. Actually it was post Civil War South. Prior to 1865 there were slaves from Africa in the South. This is all fact. No argument there. The Jews were also enslaved in Egypt before Moses led them out. Does this make Ten Commandments anti-Semitic? Yes, some of the songs in the movie were spiritual songs from the said group. (Just Sunday night I flipped on the the Cartoon Network and there was the cartoon Boondocks. Talk about degrading Blacks as an ethnic group. And this is on in Prime Time!) In fact this movie was based on short stories which were in turn based on stories that African Slaves brought from Africa. I don't think this film should be sanitized, politically corrected or cut. People who don't want to see it can simply not buy it. :icon_smil

Good points, I was just informing. By the way Boondocks is on after 10 pm (I think) so the FCC says it ok to make commets like that I guess.

Lincsong
02-22-2006, 09:54 PM
[
QUOTE=jake_fink]I think the problem that this film presents is that it is intended for an audience of children and children tend to be more impressionable than adults. I think it should be released; an added "explanation" is fine.[/QUOTE]
Yes this film was Disney's first live action film. And it blends animation with real people. We tend to believe that only children are attracted to cartoons. And we have probably all encountered a child who tried to walk through a wall like Gumby or hit someone with a hammer. (Or in my case I admit to trying both as a kid.) But it is up to the parents to teach the child that a wall is solid and a hammer can be dangerous. But, what exactly about this story needs to be "explained"? In the movie a young boy befreinds an elderly black man who tells the boy stories. The stories he tells them all have a good moral ending. And in the movie the boy attempts to transpose some of the stories into real life on the bully's down the road. When the boy is gored by the bull and is dieing in bed, the blacks gather outside the house and sing spirituals and pray for his recovery. The boy wants to see Uncle Remus. Thanks for your comments, I honestly don't see what needs to be explained.

shamus
02-22-2006, 10:28 PM
(Just Sunday night I flipped on the the Cartoon Network and there was the cartoon Boondocks. Talk about degrading Blacks as an ethnic group. And this is on in Prime Time!)

Why do you think the Boondocks degrades blacks?

MudInYerEye
02-23-2006, 12:52 AM
I saw SONG OF THE SOUTH on the big screen several times in my youth. It was my favorite Disney film as a kid. My mother would read Uncle Remus stories to me at night. I'd love to see it again.

Doh!
02-23-2006, 01:45 AM
I only vaguely remember seeing this on TV as a kid -- and even then, only the "Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah" sequence sticks in my mind. But as a piece of film history, it'd be a shame if it were never available again to the viewing public. After all, "Birth of a Nation" is available on DVD today.

Of course, it's Disney's call.

scotrace
02-23-2006, 08:06 AM
I think the name "Uncle Remus" now falls into the same category as "Little Black Sambo" or "Stepin Fetchit." A stereotype that we now understand is insulting.
But we're all grown up enough and have matured enough as a society (one would hope) that we can watch Song of the South (my father in law has the Japanese release, in english with Japanese subtitles - bizarre) without thinking blacks are all jolly, minstrel-singing magic men.
I hope they do release it.

I'm surprised Birth of a Nation is available.

Big Man
02-23-2006, 08:43 AM
I think the name "Uncle Remus" now falls into the same category as "Little Black Sambo" or "Stepin Fetchit." A stereotype that we now understand is insulting...

I remember being read "Little Black Sambo" as a child (I think our first grade teacher even read us that story - pre desegregation times, you know). What I find as interesting is that, as a child, it was nothing more than just an interesting little story for children. It wasn't until I was much older that I was told it was a story that degraded Blacks. I did not take it that way as a child, nor do I take it that way now as an adult. I would hate to think that I was stupid enough or simple-minded enough to let a simple little children's storybook shape my opinion of an entire race of fellow humans.

shamus
02-23-2006, 08:55 AM
ini mini minie moe....

MK
02-23-2006, 09:35 AM
Give us back the movie.

Matt Deckard
02-23-2006, 09:48 AM
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Brad Bowers
02-23-2006, 09:58 AM
I remember being read "Little Black Sambo" as a child (I think our first grade teacher even read us that story - pre desegregation times, you know). What I find as interesting is that, as a child, it was nothing more than just an interesting little story for children.

Last weekend, we were making pancakes, and I was thinking how my family used to eat at Sambo's Pancake restaurants. My wife hadn't heard of them. They had the story of "Little Black Sambo" painted around the restaurant. I wonder how long that chain has been gone? Long before Political Correctness came into vogue.

I loved "Song of the South" as a child. It's an important piece of Disney history, and deserves to be released. Let the public judge for themselves.

Brad

Marc Chevalier
02-23-2006, 10:18 AM
I saw "Song of the South" in the early '70s, when Disney re-released it in movie theaters. Like other non-black kids, I loved it. I didn't walk out of the theater thinking, "People of African descent are grinning, ragged, and cunning." Instead, I thought that Brer Rabbit was Bugs Bunny's ancestor. Now, if I had been a black kid instead of a white, I might have felt differently. (Then again, I might not have chosen to see the movie at all.)

Incidentally, Joel Chandler Harris (1848-1908) -- the journalist from Georgia who wrote the "Remus" tales -- was never a slaveholder. Half-Irish, poor, the product of a broken home, Harris apprenticed himself (while still a teenager) to a man who published a newspaper on his plantation. It was from the slaves on this plantation that Harris first heard the African American folktales that were to make him famous.

Lamentably, Harris placed his first version of "Uncle Remus" in an urban setting, using the character as a mouthpiece for criticizing ex-slaves, particularly those who sought political power and formal education. However, "Remus" soon evolved into the character with whom Disney fans are familiar: the gentle old man who transfixes a little white boy (Disney added a girl, for good measure) night after night (Disney made it daytime to avoid unsavory implications) with stories about small, seemingly defenseless animals whose cunning outwits stronger but less intelligent beasts.

Hardly anyone remembers that Harris also wrote several novels and a collection of sketches built around a poor white homespun philosopher called "Uncle Billy Sanders".



If there are any African-American Fedora Loungers here, what do you think of all this? Have you ever read Joel Chandler Harris's stories? Did you see the film? What's your opinion of it?



.

Harry Lime
02-23-2006, 10:34 AM
Since this is a forum that's largely about "The Good Old Days" it's not suprising that most of the posters are white males with conservative views. Fond nostalgia for the past doesn't run so deeply in many communities, they're more concerned with moving forward. Not understanding why some people don't really want to re-visit the innocence of L'il Black Sambo, Uncle Remus, Stepinfechit, Rochester, Amos 'n' Andy et all really shows a lack of true empathy toward black people. That said, that may not even be the real reason Disney doesn't re-release it. There are many, many reasons some films are released and some aren't. It could be a matter of licensing certain rights that are currently unavailable.

Harry Lime

Marc Chevalier
02-23-2006, 10:45 AM
Last weekend, we were making pancakes, and I was thinking how my family used to eat at Sambo's Pancake restaurants. My wife hadn't heard of them. They had the story of "Little Black Sambo" painted around the restaurant.

"Sambo" and "Sammy" were pejorative terms used by British colonialists for brown-skinned Indians (from India). In fact, Britons referred to Indians as "black". The "Sambo" from the restaurant was inspired by a children's book, "The Story of Little Black Sambo", authored by Helen Bannerman. Bannerman also wrote "Little Black Mingo", "Little Black Quasha", and "Little Black Quibbba".

Here, in its entirety, is "The Story of Little Black Sambo" from India. Derogatory? I leave that to you to judge. (Apparently, Indian, Pakistani and Bangladeshi children still enjoy it. If they are not offended, should we be? I'm still trying to decide.) Surprisingly, perhaps, the book can be purchased in the U.S.A. via Amazon.com.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0397300069/002-4792712-0101660?n=283155






"Once upon a time there was a little black boy, and his name was Little Black Sambo.
And his mother was called Black Mumbo.
And his father was called Black Jumbo.

And Black Mumbo made him a beautiful little Red Coat,
and a pair of beautiful little blue trousers.
And Black Jumbo went to the Bazaar,
and bought him a beautiful Green Umbrella,
and a lovely little Pair of Purple Shoes
with Crimson Soles and Crimson Linings.

And then wasn't Little Black Sambo grand?

So he put on all his Fine Clothes,
and went out for a walk in the Jungle.
And by and by he met a Tiger.
And the Tiger said to him,
"Little Black Sambo, I'm going to eat you up!"

And Little Black Sambo said,
"Oh! Please Mr. Tiger, don't eat me up,
and I'll give you my beautiful little Red Coat."

So the Tiger said,
"Very well, I won't eat you this time,
but you must give me your beautiful little Red Coat."

So the Tiger got poor Little Black Sambo's beautiful little Red Coat,
and went away saying,
"Now I'm the grandest Tiger in the Jungle."

And Little Black Sambo went on,
and by and by he met another Tiger,
and it said to him,
"Little Black Sambo, I'm going to eat you up!"

And Little Black Sambo said,
"Oh! Please Mr. Tiger, don't eat me up,
and I'll give you my beautiful little BlueTrousers."

So the Tiger said,
"Very well, I won't eat you this time,
but you must give me your beautiful little Blue Trousers."

So the Tiger got poor Little Black Sambo's beautiful little Blue Trousers,
and went away saying,
"Now I'm the grandest Tiger in the Jungle."

And Little Black Sambo went on,
and by and by he met another Tiger,
and it said to him,
"Little Black Sambo, I'm going to eat you up!"

And Little Black Sambo said,
"Oh! Please Mr. Tiger, don't eat me up,
and I'll give you my beautiful little Purple Shoes
with Crimson Soles and Crimson Linings."

But the Tiger said,
"What use would your shoes be to me?
I've got four feet, and you've got only two;
you haven't got enough shoes for me."

But Little Black Sambo said,
"You could wear them on your ears."

"So I could," said the Tiger:
"that's a very good idea.
Give them to me, and I won't eat you this time."

So the Tiger got poor Little Black Sambo's beautiful little Purple Shoes
with Crimson Soles and Crimson Linings,
and went away saying, "Now I'm the grandest Tiger in the Jungle."
And by and by Little Black Sambo met another Tiger,
and it said to him,
"Little Black Sambo, I'm going to eat you up!"

And Little Black Sambo said,
"Oh! Please Mr. Tiger, don't eat me up,
and I'll give you my beautiful Green Umbrella."

But the Tiger said,
"How can I carry an umbrella,
when I need all my paws for walking with?"

"You could tie a knot on your tail and carry it that way,"
said Little Black Sambo.

"So I could,"said the Tiger.
"Give it to me, and I won't eat you this time."

So he got poor Little Black Sambo's beautiful Green Umbrella,
and went away saying,
"Now I'm the grandest Tiger in the Jungle."

And poor Little Black Sambo went away crying,
because the cruel Tigers had taken all his fine clothes.
Presently he heard a horrible noise that sounded like "Gr-r-r-r-rrrrrr,"
and it got louder and louder.

"Oh! dear!" said Little Black Sambo,
"there are all the Tigers coming back to eat me up!
What shall I do?"

So he ran quickly to a palm-tree,
and peeped round it to see what the matter was.

And there he saw all the Tigers fighting,
and disputing which of them was the grandest.

And at last they all got so angry
that they jumped up and took off all the fine clothes,
and began to tear each other with their claws,
and bite each other with their great big white teeth.

And they came,
rolling and tumbling right to the foot of the very tree
where Little Black Sambo was hiding,
but he jumped quickly in behind the umbrella.

And the Tigers all caught hold of each other's tails,
as they wrangled and scrambled,
and so they found themselves in a ring round the tree.

Then, when the Tigers were very wee and very far away,
Little Black Sambo jumped up, and called out,
"Oh! Tigers! why have you taken off all your nice clothes?
Don't you want them any more?"

But the Tigers only answered, "Gr-r-rrrr!"

Then Little Black Sambo said,
"If you want them, say so, or I'll take them away."
But the Tigers would not let go of each other's tails,
and so they could only say "Gr-r-r-rrrrrr!"

So Little Black Sambo put on all his fine clothes again and walked off.

And the Tigers were very, very angry,
but still they would not let go of each other's tails.

And they were so angry,
that they ran round the tree,
trying to eat each other up,
and they ran faster and faster,
till they were whirling round so fast
that you couldn't see their legs at all.

And they still ran faster and faster and faster,
till they all just melted away,
and there was nothing left but a great big pool of melted butter
(or "ghi," as it is called in India)
round the foot of the tree.

Now Black Jumbo was just coming home from his work,
with a great big brass pot in his arms,
and when he saw what was left of all the Tigers he said,
"Oh! what lovely melted butter!
I'll take that home to Black Mumbo for her to cook with."

So he put it all into the great big brass pot,
and took it home to Black Mumbo to cook with.
When Black Mumbo saw the melted butter, wasn't she pleased!
"Now," said she, "we'll all have pancakes for supper!"

So she got flour and eggs and milk and sugar and butter,
and she made a huge big plate of most lovely pancakes.

And she fried them in the melted butter which the Tigers had made,
and they were just as yellow and brown as littleTigers.

And then they all sat down to supper.

And Black Mumbo ate Twenty-seven pancakes,
and Black Jumbo ate Fifty-five
but Little Black Sambo ate a Hundred and Sixty-nine,
because he was so hungry."


THE END.


http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b362/Veronicaparra/sambo_face.jpg

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b362/Veronicaparra/sambo13.jpg

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b362/Veronicaparra/sambo41.jpg

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b362/Veronicaparra/sambo80.jpg

Naama
02-23-2006, 01:51 PM
Well I'm not sure if the story of little black sambo is racist, but the drawings, for sure, they are...... I would be rather offended by them. Or well, I am offended, and I'm white......

Naama

Lena_Horne
02-23-2006, 02:06 PM
Wow.

I was asked to come over and give my opinion on the movie. I've found much more. I'm a black, 19 year old, female lover of the golden era. Through my "studies" I've learned to take most things in stride and credit it to it's times. While I've always found the Little Black Sambo somewhat offensive I've been much kinder to Uncle Remus and company. I guess it just depends on what I'm looking at and what values I can glean from it. I suppose it helps that I'm currently a history major and a writer which requires that I look at things from a much larger context. I find African-American folk songs such as "Forbidden Fruit" (I'm listening to the Nina Simone version as I type) and spirituals wonderful, relaxing even, my friends however might not agree. I have seen the stage performance of Porgy and Bess, I also listen to Miles Davis take on the soundtrack on a regular basis but I know of people who consider that entire work (as well as the Gershwin brothers) to be racist (the same could possibly be said for Carmen Jones [1954] which I also adore). At the end of the day it comes down to context. I could see this movie released with a little set up explaining its history affording parents an opportunity (should they choose) to give their children some substance. For me the experience wins out over feeling upset or cheated. While I don't agree with a lot of things (that Sambo restaurant comes to mind) as a writer I am required to empathize with a lot more than my contemporaries might. And I consider myself richer for that fact.

L_H

P.S. The Boondocks (both in comic strip form as well as television show) was created by Aaron McGruder (who is African-American) and is meant to be a social comentary both on the state of African-American/White relations today as well as politics in general. McGruder is an avowed Liberal and I was a great fan of his for a long time before getting into vintage culture. While I no longer prescribe to his sentiments exactly I certainly agree with a lot of what he has to say. The younger brother Riley is meant (as I understand it) to be a parody of today's predominant gansta rap culture and its affect on young black males. His older brother Huey however is a sensitive intellectual who tries to collar Riley as their grandfather certainly isn't going to interfere anytime soon. That said, you either like the show or you don't.

jake_fink
02-23-2006, 05:24 PM
Isn't insistently referring to someone by their race rather than just their name or individual identity by definition, racist?

Yeah!

jdjs
02-23-2006, 08:21 PM
(Preface: urban white male here)

I've been fortunate enough to have a copy of SotS on Laserdisc for several years, and in teaching both animation and film history, I really found this line of discussion interesting.

The film itself has a lot of merit - first Disney live action, combines live action and animation (though not a lot), Academy Award Winner, one of the most famous Disney songs, animated characters that still appear at parks (although many have no idea who they are), wonderful Hattie McDaniel and James Baskett performances. The film has a lot of problems too - the "happy slaves" on the plantation, disjointed story, dull and negative image adults (grandma's a busybody, mom's a pain, dad's absent (almost a divorced couple riff)), manipulative cloying resolution. The problem is - should the public be "exposed" to this, or does "big brother Disney" get to make the choice?

In discussing this with my classes (I love teen response), they quickly paralleled this with the Muslim cartoon controversy - where does free speech begin and what limits are there. The results:
- SotS is a historical (albeit inaccurate) record of its time. Were there plantations and slaves? Yes. Were they happy? Probably not. If we don't acquaint ourselves with our history (both the positive and negative), does it not make it too easy to repeat?
- SotS may have been a kid friendly movie, but does it hold up? Generally, no. This is not an animated Disney feature that younger kids will play over and over. No blood. No gore. Too much sugar. The audience would be more nostalgic for the movie than for the time (as one pointed out, remember that the civil war is a full century past, as opposed to when it opened sixty years ago.
- Is SotS offensive? No more than Huckleberry Finn or Gone with the Wind or Charlie Chan (yes, I was shocked when a group of teens knew who Charlie Chan was). Viewers are more aware of context.
-Should it be released? Yes. It is up to the public to decide whether to support or reject a movie. Some suggested that if Disney wants to restrict availability, overprice it (do a collector's set or tin, limit the release period, etc.). How many would buy it? From the class, only the students who intend to pursue animation.

My two cents.

Lincsong
02-23-2006, 09:13 PM
I read all the comments except the individual who is on my ignore list and all comments were well thought out, lucid, frank and honest. I'm glad that we all could voice our opinions on a film and not resort to attacking each other.

What I didn't like about the Boondocks on Saturday was where the older brother was contemplating watching several days of "black" television, he picked up the remote and said; "n!$$ize me". As far as the other social commentary, hey funny is funny. But, what if some 5 or 6 year old wakes up at 11 p.m. on Sunday, his parents are asleep, walks into the rumpus room, turns on the Cartoon Network and hears "n!$$ize me"? He then goes to school, says it and all of a sudden he's expelled and his parents are sent to sensitivity training?

Sambo's Restaurant; I remember it as a kid. Really nothing to get riled up over. Sub-continent Indians are genetically classified as caucasians. I'll have to bring the story up with some Indian friends and get their take on it.

Song of the South is harmless. No one is going to see it unless they pay the price of a movie ticket or buy the DVD. If it is broadcast, then put it on right at 8 p.m. and the same parents hand that turned the television on can turn the channel.

Lincsong
02-23-2006, 09:17 PM
- Is SotS offensive? No more than Huckleberry Finn or Gone with the Wind or Charlie Chan (yes, I was shocked when a group of teens knew who Charlie Chan was). Viewers are more aware of context.
-Should it be released? Yes. It is up to the public to decide whether to support or reject a movie. Some suggested that if Disney wants to restrict availability, overprice it (do a collector's set or tin, limit the release period, etc.). How many would buy it? From the class, only the students who intend to pursue animation.

The character in the Charlie Chan movies was based on a Chinese Honolulu police detective who did not carry a gun. He carried a horse whip!:cheers1:

Marc Chevalier
02-23-2006, 09:19 PM
A great thread.

jdjs
02-23-2006, 09:52 PM
The character in the Charlie Chan movies was based on a Honolulu police detective who did not carry a gun. He carried a horse whip!:cheers1:

Okay, two in one day. First, I find people under thirty who heard of Chan, and then this. I never knew that! I'll admit I was never a big CC fan - no real reason why. Thanks!

shamus
02-23-2006, 10:47 PM
But, what if some 5 or 6 year old wakes up at 11 p.m. on Sunday, his parents are asleep, walks into the rumpus room, turns on the Cartoon Network and hears "n!$$ize me"? He then goes to school, says it and all of a sudden he's expelled and his parents are sent to sensitivity training?

Song of the South is harmless. No one is going to see it unless they pay the price of a movie ticket or buy the DVD. If it is broadcast, then put it on right at 8 p.m. and the same parents hand that turned the television on can turn the channel.

But what is thats the same child that wakes up at 11 p.m. and they re-broadcast Song of the South at 11 pm! Now he goes to school singing zippidy Doo-Da!

The boondocks is on at 11 pm for a reason. That same child could turn on the television at 11 pm and watch soft-core porn since his parents have cable.

You can't classify the Boondocks with Song of the South.

Maybe we should worry less about an old film that isn't going to be released anyway (in the US) and take a look at what's going on right now.

Sinatra
02-23-2006, 11:13 PM
As a kid I saw Song of the South and came away from the movie thinking Uncle Remus was the smartest (wise), kindest and most loving adult in the film.

A hero if you will.

Such is the innocence of childhood.

MudInYerEye
02-24-2006, 01:18 AM
I'm a black, 19 year old, female lover of the golden era.
Wait a second? So you're not THE Lena Horne?
Oh man. What a bummer...

Doh!
02-24-2006, 02:00 AM
Back to Sambo's:

While the restaurant's motif may have been borrowed from the "Little Black Sambo" book, the name was not. Two friends named Sam and Bo decided to open up a restaurant together years ago...

http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Sambo's

(yet another reason I love Google -- I had only a vague memory of this story from when the chain was bought by Denny's in the '80s.)

Senator Jack
02-24-2006, 05:01 AM
About Sambo's:

I remember when the Sambo's lawsuit was going on in the 80s. I recall hearing on the radio that the case was won when the attorney for the plaintiff said 'What would people say if I went opened up a restaurant called 'K*kes.' I laughed for quite some time over that.

Certainly we don't have to look at a 60 year old picture for racism. It's all around us today. Watch 'The Simpsons' sometime. 'Hold it right there, you filthy Eye-talians' says chief Wiggum to the Fat Tony mob. Replace Italian with Blacks, Puerto Ricans, Chinese, or Bora-Borans and there would have been a major protest. Indeed, there was that Seinfeld protest over the episode where Kramer accidentally burns the Puerto Rican flag and then stomps on it. But there was the same joke done on The Simpsons a few years before, with the British flag, and we didn't have the Brits asking for an apology, did we?

Yeah, I've gone off thread hear a bit, but I can't stand when everyone shouts racism at the drop of a hat. Especially when it comes to banning art. There's a scene in 'A Day at the Races' that was routinely cut because the Marx Brothers hid out in the black part of town and wore blackface. Well, the Marx Brothers lived in an era when that was acceptable. Sure, it's wrong, but we can't judge that era by the standards we have today. To excise all such references from our inglorious past is like Stalin cutting out every reference to Trotsky in the encyclopedias. (yes, he really had this done)

Funny how people like to complain about these things. Considering all the really hateful material available out there today, to decry films like SotS and The Little Rascals series is akin to lighting a match in a forest fire.

Regards,

Senator Jack

Harry Lime
02-24-2006, 06:44 AM
Funny how people like to complain about these things. Considering all the really hateful material available out there today, to decry films like SotS and The Little Rascals series is akin to lighting a match in a forest fire.

Regards,

Senator Jack[/QUOTE]


Careful Jack. The FL is all about "complaining about these (sic) little things." Why don't they make suit armholes like they used to? Why don't they make hats like they used to? Why don't people dress like they used to? Why don't people act like they use to? These are the little things. Complaining about these things in certain circles is more like wetting down the roof of your house when a brush fire threatens it.

People complain about racism when it comes up in "every little thing" because it's a hot button topic, it's uncomfortable, and it's annoying to them when it's about something they haven't personally experienced a great deal of. It's the fact that it was treated so nonchalantly in The Golden Age that it should be watched more vigourously today. Like what you will about The Golden Age (as do I) but it was also an age of monumental prejudice and insensitivity toward race. Some of the things that go on in old films is truly cringe-worthy:
1) Humphrey Bogart adapting a "black" accent in one of his films, a brief bit of dialogue on the phone
2) In same movie HB routinely calling a black bellman "boy"
3) The prevailing part for any black actor in the Golden Age was a trifecta of choice - he could play a porter, a bellman, or a wide-eyed comic foil to a white man
4) It is easier to find a Golden Age film with the leading character in black face than it is to find one with the lead male actually being black
5) Mexicans and other ethnicities routinely treated as sub par

It annoys you that this question always pops up. It annoys others even more that it always has to. That's why race relations are a constant struggle - there was no war that was fought and completely won. The only people who think that it's a done deal are certain white people ie. "We've come so far that I don't see the problem anymore, I saw it as a kid and loved Uncle Remus." I'm sure you all did - how could you not love Uncle Remus, Stepinfethcit and Rochester? They were lovable and unthreatening, just the way a lot of folks like their black people to be.

Again, The real SOS isn't released probably isn't even racially considered - it's probably a money thing. But it has provoked a discussion that is, in reality, more about race issues than it is about the release of a film. There's a siide that sees it as no big deal and a side this sees it as a small deal that when added togetehr with a thousand others, then a thousand more - is a huge deal. It's part of a larger picture that can never be forgotten. And I'm not really buying "It's the suppression of Art" argument either. It's not banned, it's not burned, it's just not easy to find - like a copy of "Mein Kampf."

A final note on SOS - it's an average film at best anyway. There are so many more choices of better films for kids today it will never be missed. Adults who love the Golden Age can find thousand of titles readily available that are far better, many with just the right scosh of good ol' fashioned racism that goes by so fast you can ignore it or forget it if you choose.

Harry Lime

Senator Jack
02-24-2006, 07:07 AM
Being of Italian heritage, I could certainly object to the way Italians are filmically depicted to this day. In 95% of the programming out there, we're mobsters. No one can gainsay that. Are we always in an uproar? No. And if you think the Italians and Irish weren't as looked down upon as any other nationality in this country, I'd suggest checking out any history book that deals with the immigration of the twenties. Certainly, Sacco and Vezetti immediately come to mind. And, again, it is perfectly all right to stereotype both of these nationalities even to this day. Perhaps it's because we're just not as thin-skinned as everyone else.

There are Italian groups that do protest the cast of the Sopranos marching in the Columbus day parade, and they're routinely laughed off. Dismissed as being ridiculous. I guess calls of racism is only valid for certain groups. The rest of us have to take it in stride.

Practically every group throughout history has been reviled, offended, subjugated, enslaved at some point. (Ever heard of the Christians and the Lions? The Huguenots? The Puritans?) It's time to get over it like the rest of us did.


Regards,

Senator Jack

shamus
02-24-2006, 09:01 AM
I remember seeing those old photos of the water fountains labeled "Whites Only" "Colored Only," "Italians Only," "Irish Only," "Polish Only"...

What a crazy time that was....

Lena_Horne
02-24-2006, 10:28 AM
Wait a second? So you're not THE Lena Horne?
Oh man. What a bummer...


*giggle* The jig is up. No I'm not the real Lena Horne, hm, which is kind of ironic in that lately I've been idolizing Dorothy Dandridge instead. Perhaps I ought to change my name.:)

L_H

Lena_Horne
02-24-2006, 10:47 AM
I read all the comments except the individual who is on my ignore list and all comments were well thought out, lucid, frank and honest. I'm glad that we all could voice our opinions on a film and not resort to attacking each other.

What I didn't like about the Boondocks on Saturday was where the older brother was contemplating watching several days of "black" television, he picked up the remote and said; "n!$$ize me". As far as the other social commentary, hey funny is funny. But, what if some 5 or 6 year old wakes up at 11 p.m. on Sunday, his parents are asleep, walks into the rumpus room, turns on the Cartoon Network and hears "n!$$ize me"? He then goes to school, says it and all of a sudden he's expelled and his parents are sent to sensitivity training?

Sambo's Restaurant; I remember it as a kid. Really nothing to get riled up over. Sub-continent Indians are genetically classified as caucasians. I'll have to bring the story up with some Indian friends and get their take on it.

Song of the South is harmless. No one is going to see it unless they pay the price of a movie ticket or buy the DVD. If it is broadcast, then put it on right at 8 p.m. and the same parents hand that turned the television on can turn the channel.


The point of that as I imagine (I never saw that episode) is that it was a comment on the state of television aimed at Blacks today which is shall I say, atrocious. Just sitting back and watching BET requires herculean strength on my part and others might agree. I concur, the idea that some child tuning in late at night probably isn't going to get the context and certainly shouldn't be watching is true. But the events afterward might call attention to some things his parents should have been aware of in the first place. I.E. his staying up watching television when he should be getting rest for the next day. Along with his penchant for repeating things that he ought to know better than to say. And if he didn't know, now's a perfect opportunity to explain the boundaries of what is expected language from a child.

L_H

Big Man
02-24-2006, 12:08 PM
I remember seeing those old photos of the water fountains labeled "Whites Only" "Colored Only," "Italians Only," "Irish Only," "Polish Only"...

What a crazy time that was....

I remember seeing the actual signs "whites only/colored only", not just pictures of them, and wondering what difference it made who used what bathroom or drank out of what water fountain. I also remember asking my parents about those signs and them telling me that some people were "simple minded idiots" (those who felt signs like that were necessary), and that I should always try to treat EVERYONE with respect.

I grew up in a rather rural area where folks got along (and still do). Sure, there was the "colored section" and the "white section", but as best I knew, it just wasn't a big deal to either race. While our schools were segregated up until I was in the 4th grade, we still all played together after school and never gave our "differences" a second thought. When it became apparent that desegregation was coming, leaders from the black community and the white community came together to work on any issues that may arise. When desegregation came, it was just another day at school for everyone - no big deal. I give a lot of credit, and am very thankful, to the adults in our community at that time who had the foresight to work together to make that transition so smooth.

I'm sure other folks experiences are different, and I can respect how things like old movies, TV shows, cartoons, etc. can be viewed as "racist" by some and not by others. Our challenge is to find that "middle ground" and, as my parents taught me at an early age, to try to treat everyone with respect.

jamespowers
02-24-2006, 01:18 PM
5) Mexicans and other ethnicities routinely treated as sub par

To be correct, mexicans and hispanics in general were thought of as white and were counted as white for the census until 1980. They never were and still aren't a separate "race." They became "minorityized" later. So if they were treated as subpar then "whites" were indeed being treated as subpar in the age you think disparaged everyone else. I guess they were right up there with the Italians and the Irish races? :rolleyes:
Yes, there were also signs in windows that said "No Irish or Italians need apply" below the Help Wanted sign. :rolleyes: Everyone has had their day in that negative sun.


Regards to all,

J

MudInYerEye
02-24-2006, 01:40 PM
There are Italian groups that do protest the cast of the Sopranos marching in the Columbus day parade, and they're routinely laughed off. Dismissed as being ridiculous. I guess calls of racism is only valid for certain groups. The rest of us have to take it in stride.

There was an episode of THE SOPRANOS that addressed the complaints of Italian-American action groups. If memory serves, at a large dinner in Dr. Melfi's house one of the guests voices concern over Italian-Americans consistently being portrayed as criminals in film and television. One of the guests "pshaws" him with something to the effect of you don't hear the Scotch Irish-Americans complaining about the stereotypes perpetuated against them in Westerns.

Lena_Horne
02-24-2006, 01:46 PM
To be correct, mexicans and hispanics in general were thought of as white and were counted as white for the census until 1980. They never were and still aren't a separate "race." They became "minorityized" later. So if they were treated as subpar then "whites" were indeed being treated as subpar in the age you think disparaged everyone else. I guess they were right up there with the Italians and the Irish races? :rolleyes:
Yes, there were also signs in windows that said "No Irish or Italians need apply" below the Help Wanted sign. :rolleyes: Everyone has had their day in that negative sun.


Regards to all,

J
That depends on where you were I suppose. In Texas, especially along the border, discrimination was pretty rampant. Such as the case of Mexican-American WWII veterans being denied burial with other war casualities. Or the general discrimination both law-based (persecution by the Rangers) and residential:

"Children having a bath in the back of their slum corral home. People living in the corrals get their water from an outside faucet ...because one faucet serves several families the landlord pays the water fees. Some tenants say the landlord objects to too much bathing, excessive use of water by dirty Mexicans, San Antonio, Texas, 1949"

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y121/HermosaSuerte/Marron/rwl14646r200011024.jpg

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y121/HermosaSuerte/Marron/rwl14646r20002650.jpg

Living conditions:

"Corral dwellings. This corral of about twenty four units is more than thirty years old. Each unit rents for $8.50 monthly. No gas, no electricity, outside water faucets; eight outside flush type toilets, San Antonio, Texas, 1949"

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y121/HermosaSuerte/Marron/rwl14646r200071024.jpg

L_H

Lincsong
02-24-2006, 06:37 PM
You can't classify the Boondocks with Song of the South.

Maybe we should worry less about an old film that isn't going to be released anyway (in the US) and take a look at what's going on right now.[/QUOTE]

Zippity doo dah zippity dey, my oh my what a wonderful day.
versus
Ni$$ize me!

Why is one allowed to be freely broadcast on cable and satellite but the other is banned? Of course we can classify the two. I agree that we should take a look at what's going on right now, but Boondocks wasn't made in 1946 and I thought this place was about the '30s and 40's.

But I do appreciate your participation in the discussion.

Lincsong
02-24-2006, 06:49 PM
[QUOTE=jamespowers]To be correct, mexicans and hispanics in general were thought of as white and were counted as white for the census until 1980. They never were and still aren't a separate "race." They became "minorityized" later. So if they were treated as subpar then "whites" were indeed being treated as subpar in the age you think disparaged everyone else.

That is why the racial lobby gets away with saying that California and Texas were 90% white up to 1980. Let's see; Anthony Quinn, Ginger Rogers, Rita Hayworth, Don Ameche, Desi Arnaz, Ricardo Montalban, Fernando Lamas, Jose Ferrer, Mel Ferrer, James Darren and other Hispanic actors in the 1930's, 1940's and 1950's were all treated subpar. John Wayne's first wife's father was a prominent Los Angeles surgeon (Mexican/American) Then there's that 1960's bombshell Raquel Welsh. Don't make me laugh. Who brought that up? Sure these actors weren't radical nut jobs with "LA RAZA" baseball caps on like Eva Longoria and Edward James Olmos. They took their acting seriously and didn't have to play the race crying game. Let's not get too far off the subject of Song of the South. But, I really like all the comments so far. (with the exception of the individual on my ignore list)

Brad Bowers
02-24-2006, 06:54 PM
Ginger Rogers was Hispanic? I hadn't heard that before, so I looked her up. IMDb lists her birth name as Virginia Katherine McMath, from Independence, MO.

Just curious.

Brad

Lincsong
02-24-2006, 07:01 PM
Ginger Rogers was Hispanic? I hadn't heard that before, so I looked her up. IMDb lists her birth name as Virginia Katherine McMath, from Independence, MO.

Just curious.
Weren't her and Rita Hayworth first cousins?

Lincsong
02-24-2006, 07:54 PM
I was wrong in my posting that Ginger Rogers was Spanish. I had thought that Ginger Rogers and Rita Hayworth were blood cousins. It turned out that Rita Hayworth's uncle and Ginger Rogers aunt were married. Therefore their children would be half Spanish. Since Rogers and Hayworth are not blood related then Ginger Rogers isn't part Spanish. I stand corrected. Thanks for bringing that to my attention.:cheers1:

The Wolf
02-24-2006, 11:49 PM
It's interesting to read different persons thoughts on such a hot-bed topic even if I disagree ( or as I call it: just plain wrong).
One of the tricky things about enjoying the Golden Age is the differrent mind set that was common. The Mantan Moreland actor was definately more common than the Clarence Brooks actor. I'll watch "The Petrified Forest" and be surprised by the non-stereo-typed roles of the black characters then watch "Tarzan in New York" which is a sweet, fun movie and cringe at the Mantan Moreland scene.
If a main character is Asian he is played by Warner Oland (a Swede), Peter Lorre (a Hungarian) etc. but the secondary characters played by Asian actors. While watching a sweet, fun movie, "Lady on a Train" I'll cringe at the line "He had slanty eyes and buck teeth like a Jap."

I was watching an old Tom and Jerry cartoon with my sons a while ago. It ends with the coal delivery going into the house and Tom getting covered in coal dust. When the owner sees Tom and doesn't recognize him, he shuffles and talks like Steppin Fetchit to try to get away. My sons thought it was funny. I ask my boys what Tom was doing to get their view. They didn't get that it was a stereo-type they just thought he pretending to be someone else. Strangely I assumed Tom was black anyway because he sang Louis Jordan and wore a zoot suit in various episodes.

I've enjoyed radio shows and Tv. episodes of "Amos and Andy". Part of what works for is the writing. If you switch Kingfisher and Amos with Ralph and Norton it is still funny. Especially the episode where they are going to open a road side cafe.

My thoughts on "Song of the South": rate it PG like some of Shirley Temple's movie were when released on tape. Have Leonard Maltin do an intro saying "This was made in a time when...". There is a chance that the fond memories and taboo nature of this film will fade when people see it and it land not with a bang but a whimper.

I think actual equality for actors of different types is when they don't have to be any certain way. A black, Asian or gay character could be stupid, smart, brave, cowardly, a leader, a follower, etc. A middle-eastern character could be a bad guy without also having a middle-eastern good guy in the same film because we wouldn't think "He's obviously a bad guy because he's from that region.".

Sincerely,
The Wolf

Although the white people I've known are like "Married with Children"

shamus
02-25-2006, 12:22 AM
Zippity doo dah zippity dey, my oh my what a wonderful day.
versus
Ni$$ize me!

Why is one allowed to be freely broadcast on cable and satellite but the other is banned? Of course we can classify the two. I agree that we should take a look at what's going on right now, but Boondocks wasn't made in 1946 and I thought this place was about the '30s and 40's.

But I do appreciate your participation in the discussion.

Where did you see it was banned? Really? Banned? Wow. I thought Disney owned it and just didn't release it. Being banned is pretty big. That sounds like a big new story.


While watching a sweet, fun movie, "Lady on a Train" I'll cringe at the line "He had slanty eyes and buck teeth like a Jap."


thats odd you mention that as it brings us back to another thread on that very subject.

Lincsong
02-25-2006, 10:07 AM
[QUOTE=The Wolf]It's interesting to read different persons thoughts on such a hot-bed topic even if I disagree ( or as I call it: just plain wrong).
I disagree with this assement but your comments are welcomed and encouraged.:cheers1:


If a main character is Asian he is played by Warner Oland (a Swede), Peter Lorre (a Hungarian) etc. but the secondary characters played by Asian actors. While watching a sweet, fun movie, "Lady on a Train" I'll cringe at the line "He had slanty eyes and buck teeth like a Jap."
Oh but, white people you know are like Married with Children? So most white guys are romantic about high school, white wives are dyed red, spandex wearing high heeled horn dogs?


I was watching an old Tom and Jerry cartoon with my sons a while ago. It ends with the coal delivery going into the house and Tom getting covered in coal dust. When the owner sees Tom and doesn't recognize him, he shuffles and talks like Steppin Fetchit to try to get away. My sons thought it was funny. I ask my boys what Tom was doing to get their view. They didn't get that it was a stereo-type they just thought he pretending to be someone else. Strangely I assumed Tom was black anyway because he sang Louis Jordan and wore a zoot suit in various episodes.

Zoot suits? Gruber wore one in McHales Navy and his character was Jewish. Louis Jordan? Do you mean Louis Jourdan? Or Louis Prima? (Prima; the Italian American from New Orleans)


My thoughts on "Song of the South": rate it PG like some of Shirley Temple's movie were when released on tape. Have Leonard Maltin do an intro saying "This was made in a time when...". There is a chance that the fond memories and taboo nature of this film will fade when people see it and it land not with a bang but a whimper.

Good point, I don't agree with the rating or Leonard Maltin part, but put it out there if it flops it flops.


I think actual equality for actors of different types is when they don't have to be any certain way. A black, Asian or gay character could be stupid, smart, brave, cowardly, a leader, a follower, etc. A middle-eastern character could be a bad guy without also having a middle-eastern good guy in the same film because we wouldn't think "He's obviously a bad guy because he's from that region.".

The Middle Eastern Danny Thomas had a sucessful career in movies and television. I don't recall him ever wearing a turban or curly toed shoes. What would be considered an "inter-racial" couple today; Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz is the most successful television show of all time and their studio, Desilu, is responsible for numerous sucessful shows. The very Mexican looking Anthony Quinn played a variety of roles as did Ricardo Montalban and Fernando Lamas. In a Leave it to Beaver episode a Mexican family moves in and the boy, Chuy didn't speak english, but he was dressed properly in a suit and tie and his parents, who both spoke english were portrayed as being professional in a nice dress and the business suit. And let's not forget the Shakespearan performances of the Puerto Rican Jose Ferrer.

Thanks for all the comments. Everyone's has been civil and respectful. Let's keep it going.

Lincsong
02-25-2006, 10:28 AM
[QUOTE=shamus]Where did you see it was banned? Really? Banned? Wow. I thought Disney owned it and just didn't release it. Being banned is pretty big. That sounds like a big new story.

If Disney doesn't release it nor allows others to distribute it then it is effectively bannned. Although Disney owns it, (If Hollywood didn't strong arm Congress into extending the copyright laws it would now be in the public domain and the market would determine its fate.) they are practicing censorship. Let me put this into liberal context; if the Olympic Club in San Francisco doesn't admit women or blacks to their club, although club members have to be recommended and pay huge yearly dues, but the white businessmen discuss business matters and deals at the club then the club is in violation of the interstate commerce clause. Ergo, the club is now in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. (I don't mean to stray off the subject too much when I interjected this particular legal case.):cheers1:

airfrogusmc
02-25-2006, 11:01 AM
I think the film should be released if not for its artistic value for its historic value. I watched Holiday Inn around Christmas time and there are some parts that really show the way African Americans were portrayed in media back when the film was made. The question does history influence art or does art influence history? I think these films are very important in the way the took a snapshot of the way race was and the way society as a larger whole saw minorities during that time frame. They should be shown and discussed the way we are discussing it here. Things like racism will never change unless we can enter intelligent dialog about it.

Now fast forward to today: a great film on race Crash.

Lincsong
03-02-2006, 09:11 PM
I see that in a few weeks there will be an animated version of Brer Rabbits tales. All the voices will be by Black actors. But, I want the 1946 Disney version. This is the 60th anniversary. Release the film!

Lena_Horne
03-07-2006, 06:12 PM
Others have mentioned that the phrase Sambo has more to do with Indians than the African-American and this record cover from 1950 (http://www.kiddierecords.com/2005/index.htm) might just cement that fact:

http://www.kiddierecords.com/archive/week_06.jpg

L_H

*someone else on this forum provided the link, I apologize that I am unable to remember your screen name but thank you in advance.

Lincsong
03-07-2006, 08:20 PM
Their food wasn't all that bad. And the tiger's were cool as a kid.

Marc Chevalier
03-07-2006, 08:56 PM
Every Sambo's restaurant had a wonderful, huge lighted sculpture over its counter. The sculpture was made of chunks of brightly colored glass, and these globs of glass were formed to show Sambo, the tiger and their friends. It looked like chunks of multicolored, petrified jello. A nice childhood memory of mine.

Andykev
03-07-2006, 09:43 PM
We had a Sambo's in Richmond, near where I grew up. It went out of business. It was far better than IHOP, or Dennys. There was a beautiful mural in the restaurant depicting "Little Black Sambo" running, with the scene cleverly showing him being chased by the tiger, and then there was butter,syrup on the pancakes.

Richmond has a very high African American population, and this place was very well visited by EVERYONE. I seem to remember there being a protest of some sort over the "offensive" name of the place, so did they go under from competition, bad economy, or did some ACLU Attorney sue them? I don't know.

Growing up in the Berkeley/Richmond/Oakland/SF area, we had one of the most diverse cultures ANYWHERE. Both racial and political. I thank God for that as I was brought up accepting everyone for WHO they are and not WHAT someone labled them. Me included....remember "Catholics..and Irish need not apply"? Or the JFK election, he was the FIRST "Roman Catholic" and it WAS an issue.

Fortunately we have REAL people in TV, movies, corporations, leadership postions..ie Connie Rice, General Powell..etc.

So, back on TOPIC, who cares about an old movie from DISNEY with Uncle Reemus, singing "zippedy doo dah"? Even in Casablanca, Elsa says (referring to Sam), "tell the boy to come over here". WOW. But that was another TIME. Right? I work for a LARGE agency, and nobody looks at sex or color, havent for a very, very long time. I like that.

Lincsong
03-08-2006, 07:37 PM
So, back on TOPIC, who cares about an old movie from DISNEY with Uncle Reemus, singing "zippedy doo dah"? Even in Casablanca, Elsa says (referring to Sam), "tell the boy to come over here". WOW. But that was another TIME. Right? I work for a LARGE agency, and nobody looks at sex or color, havent for a very, very long time. I like that.[/QUOTE]

This was the first Disney film using real, live action people. The film blends animation with live action. It has a good story and ending. It has an Academy Award Winning Song that has become Disney's theme song. It's not just an old movie with Uncle Remus singing. It's a story about a young boy from a broken home in search of his "laughing place" a place he can go and be happy and content. He found that "laughing place" at Uncle Remus' cabin. It's a good story and in the movie Johnny and Ginny don't look at Uncle Remus' color either. Plus this is it's 60th anniversary.:cheers1:

Miss Neecerie
03-08-2006, 08:22 PM
[QUOTE]

That is why the racial lobby gets away with saying that California and Texas were 90% white up to 1980. Let's see; Anthony Quinn, Ginger Rogers, Rita Hayworth, Don Ameche, Desi Arnaz, Ricardo Montalban, Fernando Lamas, Jose Ferrer, Mel Ferrer, James Darren and other Hispanic actors in the 1930's, 1940's and 1950's were all treated subpar.

ok....I know you said 'and others'....

but I just have to mention both Caesar Romero and Carmen Miranda....just because well...I adore them!

Denise...usless post for the day ;)

Marc Chevalier
03-08-2006, 09:03 PM
And Lupe Velez, the so-called "Mexican Spitfire."

And Roman Novarro, the first "Ben Hur" (1925).

DanielJones
03-16-2006, 02:04 PM
Well I suppose if folks are going to get offended by Song of the South they better stay off of Splash Mountain at Disneyland since it is based on a portion of the movie. And does anyone bat an eyelash at Aunt Jemimah syurp? Did you know there used to be Uncle Remus syurp as well? Go figure huh? Oh, I know I'm going to raise some hackles here, but there is just a double standard for everything. These things are only offensive if you give them the power to be offensive. Take that power away and they are mere words & objects. But hey, that's just my two cents.

Cheers!

Dan

Lincsong
03-17-2006, 07:16 AM
This thread has been quite civil and respectful.:cheers1: Everyone's opinion is encouraged and respected. Let's continue the productive and healthful progress that we have enjoyed.:eusa_clap

Roger
03-19-2006, 08:09 PM
I thought this was a great little film. Saw it in the '70's and it really is an innocent little film. Great uplifting story. Disney needs to release it and let the market determine it's fate.:)

RedPop4
03-24-2006, 02:35 PM
Brer Rabbit Syrup was made all over by the Penick & Ford Company. They had a plant near where I grew up on the west bank of the Mississippi River in Greater New Orleans. There's nothing left, now of the old Penick & Ford plant; I believe there is one in New Jersey (not certain) that still makes Brer Rabbit Syrup.

Since it's no longer a Louisiana product, I use Steen's Cane Syrup instead. It's not the best, but to get the best, you have to drive down into cane country and look for folks selling cane syrup out of their homes.

Sorry for the threadjack.

The stories, told by the slaves, that Joel Chandler Harris made famous, were first told in French and written down as "Compair Lappin" on the Laura Plantation in Vacherie Louisiana.

Lincsong
03-24-2006, 06:47 PM
[QUOTE=RedPop4]Brer Rabbit Syrup was made all over by the Penick & Ford Company. They had a plant near where I grew up on the west bank of the Mississippi River in Greater New Orleans. There's nothing left, now of the old Penick & Ford plant; I believe there is one in New Jersey (not certain) that still makes Brer Rabbit Syrup.

I still see that Brer Rabbit syrup on the shelves.

jdjs
03-24-2006, 08:20 PM
Ultimate Disney (www.ultimatedisney.com) carried this news article on March 11th:

"March 11, 2006 - A little over a year ago, a website which specializes in Disney-related speculative journalism reported getting inside word that Song of the South would be coming to DVD this fall as a special 60th Anniversary Edition. While this source has gotten some accurate scoops in the past, we classified this Song of the South news as rumor. The story was conceivable as various signs over the past few years have pointed to Disney finally giving this 1946 live action-animated musical a North American home video release, but this source was the only place reporting a firm release window. Yesterday, at Disney's annual shareholders meeting in Anaheim, current CEO Robert Iger debunked those rumors, claiming that he screened the movie recently and holds concerns about its depictions, even considering the context in which it was made. Citing "a sensitivity that exists in today's culture", he confirmed that a decision to not re-release the film ensures that a home video release will not be occurring in the foreseeable future."

Lincsong
03-24-2006, 08:38 PM
Ultimate Disney (www.ultimatedisney.com) carried this news article on March 11th:

"March 11, 2006 - A little over a year ago, a website which specializes in Disney-related speculative journalism reported getting inside word that Song of the South would be coming to DVD this fall as a special 60th Anniversary Edition. While this source has gotten some accurate scoops in the past, we classified this Song of the South news as rumor. The story was conceivable as various signs over the past few years have pointed to Disney finally giving this 1946 live action-animated musical a North American home video release, but this source was the only place reporting a firm release window. Yesterday, at Disney's annual shareholders meeting in Anaheim, current CEO Robert Iger debunked those rumors, claiming that he screened the movie recently and holds concerns about its depictions, even considering the context in which it was made. Citing "a sensitivity that exists in today's culture", he confirmed that a decision to not re-release the film ensures that a home video release will not be occurring in the foreseeable future."

Whenever I get the proxy in the mail to vote for the Board of Directors I always withold my votes. With just a handful of shares I know it doesn't make a difference, but it does take patience. Iger is a big lefty like his buddy Eisner and Mitchell. Why don't he just take down all of Walt's pictures? Funny how Iger will put all the filth of Desperate Housewives on the airwaves but won't re-release a film that people would actually have to buy. Hypocrites! Well what do you expect from the same nuts who took the fake guns away from the Jungle Ride? Or who made a movie about the Alamo from the Mexican despots viewpoint?

John in Covina
03-24-2006, 11:16 PM
What will people be complaining about, how we did such and such or how we treated so in so's, 20 years from now? History, in order to be told correctly should include the truth. If things were bad then, then in order not to repeat the past we must LEARN from it. If history gets re-written leaving out all the "bad" stuff then the history is not true and you don't get the full and correct lessson to learn.

In the original ET the Agency guys chasing Elliott and ET were armed with GUNS (God forbid! Horrors!) In the last release they digitally removed the guns and made them FLASHLIGHTS. Why? To what affect? For what reason? Does someone think that at the time, that generation of kids could handle the idea of guns, but now kids can't? ?!

The Log Cabin Series release of the Little Rascals has kept intact some scenes that were cut by the late 60's early 70's TV because of the portrayal of blacks and there were instances of "ethnic" humor that were dropped as whole episodes. To destroy or erase these scenes does not allow the learning that needs to come from seeing actual representations of second class citizenship and racial bias. Leonard Maltin carefully explaned that this shows the change in attitudes of the nation over time.

Get out your microscope and answer this question: Is Blazing Saddles a racist movie? Clearly Yes, by what is shown, or No becasue of the treatment of what is shown. DOES intent mean anything?

Here is the rub, parents must be prepared to watch TV & movies with their children and help the children to interpet what is happening on screen, what is being said, and what you want your children to know, think and feel and why when questionable items come up. Address them and things go better hide them and lose the opportunity to teach.

Lincsong
03-25-2006, 12:44 PM
:eusa_clap
That was as well written and thought out as any post I've seen in a long time. Blazing Saddles made the racists look like fools. It is a great film. Much better than Robin Hood Men in Tights. The Little Rascals had black and white kids playing together. I would much rather have children watching the Little Rascals than sing that delightful diddy from the Academy Award Winning film Hustle and Flow; Now, it's hard to be a pimp.[huh]