Keskustelujen arkisto

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
Author

Topic: 'Song of the South' makes Time's 'Top 10 Controversial Cartoons' list

(77 messages)
Lars Jensen
I'm gonna quote a bit of the article...
Quote from user: Time.comSet in the post??Civil War South, the movie ?? in which a former slave named Uncle Remus regales children with amusing stories ?? depicts an offensively "idyllic" master-slave relationship, as the NAACP once described it. Adam Clayton Powell Jr. considered the feature's depictions of happy slaves an "insult to American minorities."
The article correctly states that the movie is set in the post??Civil War period. As probably every human being on Earth knows, the Civil War ended with slavery being abolished. How can the movie possibly depict "an offensively 'idyllic' master-slave relationship" when it takes place AFTER THE CIVIL WAR?

Don't they have any standards for journalism at Time.com?
GeoX
Quote from user: Lars JensenHow can the movie possibly depict "an offensively 'idyllic' master-slave relationship" when it takes place AFTER THE CIVIL WAR?
Because although it takes place after the War, the dynamic depicted in the movie is exactly the same as it would have been in the antebellum south. The same hierarchies are very much in place--it ain't subtle. When the main kid has a birthday party, the possibility that his black friend would be invited apparently never even crossed the filmmakers' minds. I'm sure they wouldn't have consciously realized what they were doing, but the implication that there are boundaries that must be maintained rings loud and clear. I'm against censorship on principle, of course, but I have to admit, I found the movie much more offensive than I would have expected to. I certainly wouldn't want MY notional children watching it.

So don't slander some poor online journalist.
Kneon
I think it's pretty fair to say that this one is going to stay in the vault. Indefinitely.
Morequack
Quote from user: KneonLink: http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1984966_1984961_1946718,00.html
This is yet another symptom of the mental disease afflicting the "progressive" modern man. To spasm thus in the name of political correctness against the unmovable reality of history is akin to the lunacy of the Nazi book-burnings of the 1930s. To be offended by the "Song of the South" is to be a caveman. (And speaking of a caveman, I'm sure if there were a live specimen thawed out from his millennial slumber, those Geico TV commercials would have to be dropped faster that you could say, 'unbelievable!'.) Adam Clayton Powell Jr., and such others, ought to get over themselves and move along. Or join the ranks of the Mohammad cartoon irregulars.

My children have seen the 'Song.' And now I will make it a point to show it to them again. And in so doing point to the article and try to explain to them why the world has become so neurotic and fearful.
GeoX
I try to avoid using off-color language here, but in this case I think it's warranted: [...] for equating me with Nazis because I don't like racist movies.
[edited by Cacou]
Furienna
I'm sorry, GeoX, but I have to agree with Morequack here. Banning "Song of the South" is so silly, that I have no words for it. I haven't seen this movie, but if there's racism in it, it's probably just because it takes place in a time, where racism still was strong. And not all slaves were mistreated, so many of them were happy with their lives. And after the war, some former slaves stayed with their former owners. So it all just sounds realistic.
Rodney
It's not very logical to invite the black friend to the party when that NEVER would've happened during the time that the film was to take place (or quite possibly when the film was made for that matter).
When I saw Song of the South in 1986, at the age of 7, I was not shocked at this, because my parents had taken the time to explain to me that things were different and wrong then. If you don't want your kids to watch it, that's fine. But let parents make that decision for themselves.
That said, aside from the animated segments, it's just not that good of a movie.
Kneon
If (and that's a big "if") this movie ever sees another home video release in the U.S., it will no doubt have some sort of a disclaimer/apology attached to the beginning. Maybe they'll release it as part of a Treasures collection aimed at adults vs. a standard release for the kiddies...?
GeoX
Quote from user: FuriennaAnd not all slaves were mistreated, so many of them were happy with their lives.
...as though an absolute lack of bodily autonomy doesn't count as "mistreatment." Good lord.

Quote from user: RodneyIt's not very logical to invite the black friend to the party when that NEVER would've happened during the time that the film was to take place (or quite possibly when the film was made for that matter).
It wouldn't be surprising if this were meant to be a grittily realistic depiction of the times, no. The issue is that this is a kids' move in which this racial dynamic is unproblematically presented as a positive state of affairs. I'm baffled that this is being defended on the grounds that it's "realistic." Sure, the socioeconomic situation is "realistic." That doesn't mean it has to be celebratory, certainly not as its presented to children.

That said, you're going to have to point me to the part where I said I think the movie's suppression is therefore a good thing. There is no need to get self-righteous over something I never said and don't believe.
Hedberg
Leonard Maltin could probably get upfront again, telling us that no Uncel Remus' was aloud to mingle with them white folks on Maggie's farm, until after the killing of Martin Luther King. The movie, in general, is to "Lemonadish and Cookiesh" in the live-action segments, but we would've missed Brer Rabbit, Brer Fox and Brear Bear, if it wasn't for The Song of the South!

What about The Birth of a Nation, The Klansmen, The General and the likes?
The Moviehistory isn't moviehistory without the past - you can't evaluate and expect our children to learn without the pros and cons !
Rodney
I'm probably not the best person to say. I think Mantan Moreland is funny.
But I didn't mean to come of as self righteous. My point, which I stand by, is that viewed in the correct context, there's nothing wrong with the movie, except, as I said before, it's just not very good.
Lars Jensen
Quote from user: GeoXQuote from user: Lars JensenHow can the movie possibly depict "an offensively 'idyllic' master-slave relationship" when it takes place AFTER THE CIVIL WAR?
Because although it takes place after the War, the dynamic depicted in the movie is exactly the same as it would have been in the antebellum south. [...] So don't slander some poor online journalist.

If that's what the journalist meant, then that's what the journalist should have written. Uncritically quoting remarks such as "an offensively 'idyllic' master-slave relationship" is bad journalism.
Lars Jensen
Quote from user: GeoXI don't like racist movies.
"Song of the South" is racist? In which scene do the filmmakers try to convince the audience that blacks are inferior to whites?!? (Which blacks aren't, of course.)

Quote from user: FuriennaAnd not all slaves were mistreated, so many of them were happy with their lives.
Off-topic, but: I highly doubt many slaves were happy with being slaves. Being someone else's property, being locked up, being whipped, being mutilated in case of a rebellious attitude and having your girlfriend repeatedly raped by the white owner's son certainly isn't my idea of a perfect life.

Quote from user: GeoXThat said, you're going to have to point me to the part where I said I think the movie's suppression is therefore a good thing. There is no need to get self-righteous over something I never said and don't believe.
Quote from user: GeoXI certainly wouldn't want MY notional children watching it.
Morequack
Quote from user: GeoXI try to avoid using off-color language here, but in this case I think it's warranted: fuck you for equating me with Nazis because I don't like racist movies.
Perhaps your expressed desire to engage me in sexual activity is warranted, and I'm flattered, but nevertheless it is unrelated to the fact of the matter. The pendulum always swings both ways; racism's counterpart is not reverse racism, it is political correctness taken to the nth degree where it festers this day. The two are complementary and equal opportunity ills. Get well soon.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6