Originally Posted By mrichmondj <<<< I would suggest a letter writing campaign to show Iger there is an interest in the release of the movie as a part of Disney's history >>>>> Mr. Iger acknowledged at the meeting that there was interest in releasing this movie. He also acknowledged that Disney had a financial interest to do it as well -- he expected that the DVD would sell quite well. However, he also provided his personal reaction to the film after screening it a couple of months ago -- and right now, he personally does not see a way to release it without generating the sort of negative attention on the Disney brand that would ensue. So, it's not all about market interest or pure dollars and cents here.
Originally Posted By Jim I can't wait for the day when evaluating the potential impact of a film from some 60 years ago and its depictions of African-Americans will seem trite and overly politicially correct because our society will have come so far. I think our society's lack of acceptance of these past issues shows that we are still in need of learning, education, and continuing change because it is clearly still sensitivie. Still, I wish I could see it and make the decision for myself.
Originally Posted By BlueDevilSF Well, given their penchant for remaking their own films, maybe Disney could put together a "modern, more politically correct retelling" of "Song of the South." *tongue firmly in cheek*
Originally Posted By CrouchingTigger Maybe they'll release it, but they'll redo the cartoon voices with the likes of Mel Gibson and Billy Crystal. *rolls eys* Unfortunately, I'd bet money that that is exactly how they'll do it.
Originally Posted By DlandDug There are two major categories of "objectionable" material in Song of the South. The obvious problems for many are in the depiction of the African-American characters. Although the story is set shortly after the Civil War, the plantation depicted in the film is still maintained by a group of apparently freed slaves who prefer life under their former master. There are any number of uncomfortable phrases and line deliveries, both from the human performers, and the cartoon characters who clearly are intended to parody negro character types. For many people, even the suggestion that the plantation system was anything other than degrading is simply unacceptable. Some critics take a deeper view of Song of the South. The stories, collected by a white southerner, are "told" by kindly Uncle Remus, a black man. But the language is not the authentic voice of a black man, but rather a stereotypical voice created by a white man. Further, Disney's version does harm to the deeper meaning of the stories. Brer Rabbit represents the impish spirit that longs to be free. Specifically, the stories in their original form (as told authentically by slaves) were essentially coded messages about bondage, freedom, and the desire of the human spirit to be free. Disney's version, on the other hand, identifies Brer Rabbit with a little white boy, played by Bobby Driscoll. Uncle Remus' stories become cautionary tales about the importance of obedience and facing obligations. So... while I do not necessarilly agree with these objections, I do understand them. And I agree with Bob Iger that the release of Song of the South would create more problems than the possible profit can justify.
Originally Posted By basil fan >Disney's version, on the other hand, >identifies Brer Rabbit with a little >white boy, played by Bobby Driscoll. SPOILER!!!! Actually, it's about how a wise ex-slave & his tales affected a white family so much that the father (Joel Chandler Harris) wrote the tales & preserved them for posterity. It's historical...well, as historical as Disney gets in their fantasy films. SPOILERS ARE DONE While I agree that many people will look at the film as you are looking at it, you're basically saying that these tales are not for you, white girl. Do I have to stop watching Mulan, too? Disney Villains <a href="http://www.whatsitsgalore.com/disney/villain.html" target="_blank">http://www.whatsitsgalore.com/ disney/villain.html</a>
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>...you're basically saying that these tales are not for you, white girl. Do I have to stop watching Mulan, too?<< No, I am saying that there have been legitimate criticisms that Song of the South misapplies its morals, identifying them with a little white boy instead of with powerless slaves. If Disney's Mulan was about a noble black boy who posed as a white soldier during the American Civil War, Chinese viewers could legitimately complain.
Originally Posted By cstephens DlandDug wrote: > No, I am saying that there have been legitimate criticisms that Song of the South misapplies its morals, identifying them with a little white boy instead of with powerless slaves. I'm going to say the same about the Kevin Costner character in "Dances With Wolves". The white man who gives up his cushy life is the hero and wasn't it nice that he decided to hang with all those savage indians? There are lots of things in various movies that I find objectionable. That means I either don't see them to begin with or I don't see them again. I don't see how it gives me the right to decide what someone else gets to see. /cs
Originally Posted By oc_dean I can almost imagine the EBAY auction prices for the Japanese laser disc of this! :O) If there are any!
Originally Posted By basil fan But if a Hun kid met Mulan & learned a life lesson from her, would that be offensive? It's not as if Uncle Remus or Brer rabbit were cast as white characters. I thought the lessons taught by Uncle Remus were pretty universal. But that's just my opinion. Basil of Baker Street <a href="http://www.whatsitsgalore.com/basil/bakerst.html" target="_blank">http://www.whatsitsgalore.com/ basil/bakerst.html</a>
