THis probably has been adressed somewhere, but does anyone think Disney's most controversial film, will ever be released on DVD? It makes no sense that they would have a ride(one of the biggest mind you) at Disneyland,showing charcters from the film. Most people don't know what the story relates to, or anything. People always complain and say, "It's racist and the black people this and the black people that." Just shut up, and release this timeless classic of a film. I am so lucky I got a Laserdisc copy of this from Japan when I did. Still I hope and pray thay Disney will understand what the public really wants, and release their most controversial film ever. Because I'm telling you it would sell like hot cakes.

No.

How can studios release ultra violent films(i.e. The Last Boy Scout and Pulp Fiction, which I believe are both owned by Touchstone), to other studios that release films that heavily degrade women(i.e. The Last Boyscout, The Player's Club) and nobody raises a fuss at all. I 'm sorry but it really makes me mad. This film is a part of history. It happended during a period in our time. Get over Black people. Uncle Remus is never called the n word and they never even use the word slave once in that film. Its a part of our animation history. More children need to know the power, humor and sweet nature of Uncle Remus. Black people(and yes, I know not all hate the film) get mad over a character like him, but have no problem with characters like Chris Rock and Chris Tucker who really act like a modern day Stephin Fetchit.

Because.

Originally posted by Dalvin
but have no problem with characters like Chris Rock and Chris Tucker who really act like a modern day Stephin Fetchit.

Gay people on TV are the new Stephin Fetchits, not Chris Rock. There is a difference between being laughed with and laughed at.

As far as Song of the South it would be nice if it were released. It is a really good film, but I think Eisner has said several times it will never leave the vault.

I doubt we'll ever see this released on DVD.

I have it on DVD. :P

http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=276613

forget dvd, I gots it on LD. ;)

Originally posted by Jackskeleton
forget dvd, I gots it on LD. ;)

forget the LD, I gots it on DVD and it plays on my computer (has menus too)

I think there is a chance. Although the politically correct cops won't like it. It is a very nice film. The live action/animation mix is just beautiful. The story is nice and entertaining. Believe it or not, I was in kindergarten when this was given a limited re-release in 1986 and my class went to see it!!! (There would probably be a lawsuit if that happened today.)

Anyways, in today's PC world, Disney's only hope would be to release it as a "Walt Disney Treasures" title with Leonard Maltin doing an introduction talking about how the film was filmed in a different time, blah blah blah. And they would probably ban the sale of it to minors!!!

[MAJOR RANT] This PC crap annoys me more than anything else as far as films are concerned. I hate it. Why people want to ignore film history is beyond me. Besides, the film is not that bad. People claim it is racist because it shows blacks (oh, sorry, African-Americans) working for whites (oops, I mean Caucasian-Americans) on a Southern plantation. Seriously though, it is not nearly as bad as people make it out to be. The film shows Uncle Remus as a role model and also shows black and white children getting along as friends. I think it is actually a rather nice picture. Now, some people have said it trivializes slavery, etc. That may be true, but it was a children's film and I think it is not a bad thing to see a black character be the role model and to see children of both races as friends. What is so horrible about that? I mean, come on!! By these standards, we should also censor Gone With The Wind!!! Give me a break! When are we going to grow up? Political-correctness is so ridiculous. Are we adults or are we 4 years old? Are we going to get our precious little feelings hurt? Can we not handle it? It is absurd. And there is a double standard. It is OK for rappers/musicians to belittle women, use racial slurs in their music and promote disorderly activity...but seeing a nice little film that deals with blacks and whites after the Civil War is offensive?!?! How screwed up is that? I hate that kind of stupidity. Now, don't get me wrong. If Disney never wants to release it again, then fine! That is their right. That is NOT censorship. (Only the government can be responsible for censorship). I have ZERO right to EVER own Song of the South if Disney does not want to release it. That is totally their right. However, I think it is just a shame that childish sensitivities may influence them to not release a nice film out of fear of being picketed and branded as racist (which is as bad as being accused of being a child molester today)... Oh, but what about the precious little children?!?!?!?? What if this film warps their fragile little minds??? Well, parents, if you do not want your kids to watch it, then I have a radical, yet feasible solution for you.... Don't let them watch it!!! Problem solved. Should we ban South Park because some of us may not want young children watching it?? NO WAY!! I enjoy the show, but that doesn't mean I would let my 6 year old watch it (if I had a kid, which I will in 5 months!). It is called P-A-R-E-N-T-I-N-G!! If you do not want your kids watching SotS, then do not let them watch it. If you are someone who would have your world just crushed by the horrible, horrible thing that is Song of the South, then DON'T WATCH IT!! See, everything is OK. Those who do not wish to see it do not have to buy it. Those of us who want to see it will buy it. We all really need to get beyond this whole PC stage. Really. It is beyond childish. [/MAJOR RANT]

Sorry for the rant. I just HATE (ooh, I said the *H* word) HATE HATE political correctness in all forms and flavors.

Anyways, SotS is a lovely little film that I hope will be released soon. :)

Zack

Originally posted by Class316
forget the LD, I gots it on DVD and it plays on my computer (has menus too)

Well I do also have the file on my PC.. but I like things I can touch and are legit. ;)

Way to go ZackR, I am black and think that they should release the movie. I don't think there is anything racist about the movie, when I was a child I did not like it, but I did not like a lot of Disney and I don't like a lot of Disney now, I do have a few. I am a Warner Brothers Girl. I think Black people make to much of the past, yes slavery was bad, jim crow was bad, and no matter what everybody is not going to like everybody else, be it skin color, height, eye color and it is time to move foward and not back. Maybe it is time to start letting Disney know how you and others fell about this movie, because in the end it comes down to MONEY and if Disney sees that people are willing to spend hard earned MONEY for this product they will do what they need to do to release it. Thsat's My 2 cents

movie diva,

You rock. I sent an email several months ago to an address that was over at www.ultimatedisney.com and told them I wanted Song of the South to be released. I got a standard email autoresponse from them. I think they know there is decent interest - especially amongst us movie fans. They are just a little sheepish about releasing something that is considered so "controversial." They probably have nightmares of boycotts, etc. Oh well. I think common sense will eventually prevail though. :)

Originally posted by ZackR
I have ZERO right to EVER own Song of the South if Disney does not want to release it.

Huh?? You have full "right" to own it even in the legal sense! It got official releases on VHS and LD (just not in the US)!

So basically, DIE EISNER, DIE NAACP FU AND DIE DIE DIE!!

Originally posted by Jackskeleton
Well I do also have the file on my PC.. but I like things I can touch and are legit. ;)

Umm....I can touch my DVD fine. And it’s taken from a legit laserdisc :D


And although it is illegal [by state laws] to have it on DVD, it is in fact very very moral.

If Walt were alive today, he would have wanted people to have Song of the South on DVD! The current Disney administration is basically pissing on Walt’s grave (on many things, not just Song of the South)!! Song of the South is Walt’s creation!! If he saw that Song of the South would never get a DVD release he’d cry in his grave!!! So, honor the REAL Disney and piss on Eisner’s pseudo Disney [and political correctness] by obtaining a nice copy of Song of the South.

Originally posted by Class316
forget the LD, I gots it on DVD and it plays on my computer (has menus too)

Oh yeah...well my dvd has not only menus and no subtitles, it also has extras. Two trailers (for Song of the South) and a 1940's complete radio broadcast with Johnny Mercer hosting and includes Walt Disney (gushing at how great the movie is...which ironic) & all the cast including the actor who plays Uncle Remus. Beat that. :)

Originally posted by brianluvdvd
Oh yeah...well my dvd has not only menus and no subtitles, it also has extras. Two trailers (for Song of the South) and a 1940's complete radio broadcast with Johnny Mercer hosting and includes Walt Disney (gushing at how great the movie is...which ironic) & all the cast including the actor who plays Uncle Remus. Beat that. :)

Mine has menus, the two trailers, and the radio broadcast with Johnny Mercer that includes Walt Disney (I also have that and two other radio broadcasts on MP3 format). But it has subtitles ONLY during songs (which are not annoying).

So are you sure your transfer is from an LD? Cause if it has no subs it could either be from the UK or AU VHS or it could be from the rare HK LD.

Also, I’ve read that the Japanese laserdisc has slightly more footage than the UK VHS. Not sure how it compares to the HK LD.

I think PC will stop this from ever coming out on dvd

Mine has no subtitles at all. I have no idea what it is transfered from.

I have owned both VHS & DVD copies of SOTS bootlegs. I would have gladly bought legit copies if they were available. I would gladly replace my copy of SOTS if a legit copy is ever released (as I plan to do this fall with the Indiana Jones flicks).

I don't like bootlegs but if what I want is not available, I have no problems with owning one or other people having them. The market is there, why not release it? Disney is keeping the bootleg market alive by not releasing it. Hell, if Lucas got a cut of the bootlegs of his films that he refuses to release, he would be a very rich man. ;) Why would anyone truly want a lower quality bootleg copy of anything when a perfect legit copy is avail at a fair price?

Originally posted by costanza187
I think PC will stop this from ever coming out on dvd

Until people come to their senses and vote for the right people (instead of Bush and Clinton). Then pc will die.

PC will never die when you have the average joe with a certain mindset. even if some one new is in the role who isn't so PC, you will still get this from a company. they want to please as many as the people as possible. they dont want to risk pissing off some potential cash by releasing this in any way.

I always wondered why people get so worked up over this movie. You know the only reason is because you can't get it. If it was out just like any other movie, people would care less about it.


Remember Black Culdron? People said all things about how it was one of the best Disney movies before it got released and how it was a crime by Disney not to have it out. Now that Disney released it, nobody mentions it at all. You would think that the 'best' Disney movie would be mentioned often. Nope.

Originally posted by resinrats
I always wondered why people get so worked up over this movie. You know the only reason is because you can't get it. If it was out just like any other movie, people would care less about it.

You’re probably correct. But it’s still the principle of it that counts.

Remember Black Culdron? People said all things about how it was one of the best Disney movies before it got released and how it was a crime by Disney not to have it out. Now that Disney released it, nobody mentions it at all. You would think that the 'best' Disney movie would be mentioned often. Nope. [/B]

Why was Black Culdron considered "bad" ?

The way i understand it about Song of the South not being relesed is not because the blacks were slaves is because there was no set date to when the movie was supposed to take place either before the Cival War or after so the Blacks are basically shown as happy slaves and i think thats why they why they won't release IT. Because it would be wrong to show a movie that basically said blacks were happy slaves when there were horribler things done to them in that time.

Disney had really good intentions it was just misued and they forgot to clarify a few things. I think it that had been done. There would be no problem with Song of the South and we'd be watching it on DVD right now.

I really want to see Song of the South to but i understand why they never will release it and why would they if they have a film thats so historically unacurate.

Also about Black Cauldron your right they made a big deal when it got released a couple years ago. It got my attention and i really wanted it finally someone bought it for me. I watched it once and haven't really watched it since.

Originally posted by Which Button?
I really want to see Song of the South to but i understand why they never will release it and why would they if they have a film thats so historically unacurate.

Banning things cause they’re “historically inaccurate” means banning basically all movies. :rolleyes: Except of course the ones that bare the label “based on a true story”.

The slavry and the plantations were a horrible thing that happened. And to release a movie where they were considered happy would be wrong. Its like people who say the Holocaust never happened you know who horrible and disrecpectful that is is to millions of people?

Originally posted by Which Button?
The way i understand it about Song of the South not being relesed is not because the blacks were slaves is because there was no set date to when the movie was supposed to take place either before the Cival War or after so the Blacks are basically shown as happy slaves and i think thats why they why they won't release IT. Because it would be wrong to show a movie that basically said blacks were happy slaves when there were horribler things done to them in that time.



Where in the movie is it portrayed that all the slaves are happy slaves? There is only one scene where you see a group of slaves and they are singing at nighttime. That doesn't make them happy.

Slavery doesn't really come into the plot at all. It's not like this Gone With The Wind.

Originally posted by Which Button?
The slavry and the plantations were a horrible thing that happened. And to release a movie where they were considered happy would be wrong.

Have you even seen Song Of The South?

No i never saw it. I really want to because i'm curious. I first heard about it a year ago and was so intrigued and interested why Disney would ban a movie and not want anyone to see it so i did research, read articles, read reviews and talked to people who saw it.

And thats the feeling i got about the film from he people i talked to and reviews. And by what they said i can see why its not released.

I really would like to see the film and i think it should be on DVD. But from what i heard i can see why they'd never release it.

So i apologize if i'm wrong i'm just going from word of mouth and reviews.

They aren't slaves in the movie. They are working on a plantation after the Civil War, as many did because they had few other options. And yes, slavery was horrible, but the slaves were a remarkable group of people. They oftentimes made the best of their situation and they definitely sang together. That is where the old term "Negro spiritual" came from. They were an amazingly strong group of people. Even though they were in an atrocious situation, they could find reason to sing. It is a testament to their fortitude.

And if historical inaccuracies should keep a movie from public view, then my collection would get much smaller. No, it has nothing to do with history... The PC cops amongst us would just as soon erase certain history in order to avoid "offending" the ultra-sensitive. Man, I hate political correctness.

I have seen SotS many times. I owned a PAL VHS and now own an excellent LD transfer that has no subtitles and is the best quality I have seen yet. I would buy this tomorrow in an instant if Disney released it. And it is much better than "The Black Cauldron' It is much better. It may not be "Snow White" or anything like that, but it is excellent IMHO.

It is amazing what is hidden away and what is considered OK. I mean, I can go to Suncoast and buy films and music videos that many many people would find just utterly offensive and disgusting. Songs about killing cops, beating your wife, and using women as nothing more than sex objects is just fine... It is artists "expressing themselves." BUT BUT BUT.... a half century year old film that shows black and white children as friends, plantation blacks sing in a bad situation and Uncle Remus is shown as a role model....that is horrible and must be hidden from the unsuspecting public who could never handle such terrible things. Oh well. The stupidity and idiocy never ceases to amaze me. I still think this will be releases someday...perhaps when the PC cops are busy changing each other's diapers....

It would be great for this to get released, and it would probably make a ton of money. But the fact remains Disney won't budge on this title, much like they won't budge on the "Laying in the street" footage from The Program.

It caused waves and they don't want to cause waves. Just like they sold Dogma to Columbia/Tri Star.

They also have enough money that they can afford to shelve titles forever and not worry about.

You know, I just watched Jezebel (1938) for which Bette Davis won an Academy Award. It takes place before the Civil War in New Orleans so black people are still slaves. Guess what? The black people are depicted as apparently fairly happy and they are shown singing. The film, like Gone With the Wind and Song of the South are, at least partly, a product of the time they were made.

None of those three movies would be made quite the way they were made if they were made today. I think that's a good thing but these are still all good films in spite of their faults. Regarding their depiction of black people, I think Song of the South is the least offensive of the three.

There are many other examples but Disney gets more scrutiny than any other studio so we have this situation with SotS and not the others.

Guess what? The black people are depicted as apparently fairly happy and they are shown singing.

Yes, and another thing... Slavery was an atrocious crime as I mentioned above. However, why should SotS be panned just because it dares to show the people being happy at times? I mean, just because a movie is about slaves or former slaves, does that mean they must be shown in complete despair and hopelessness?? NO!! Now, slavery should not be trivialized in any way, yet those brave people endured and managed to find their own happiness at times. Did slaves sing? You bet they did. I think it is insulting for people to say that they can not be depicted as singing or having any kind of joy. That would not make sense. Oh well. Political correctness has never made sense any way. It is simply an emotional over-reaction by hyper-sensitive people.

And yes, of the three films you mention, SotS is by far the least "offensive." But it is scrutinized because Disney is a "family" company. I guess PC parents think that if SotS is released, then the DVD will somehow magically fly from the store into their DVD players and force their kids to watch it!! I mean, God forbid we should as adults to actually be responsible parents and monitor their kids' TV viewing. Besides, I am sure most kids have watched MUCH worse than Song of the South.

Kinda like the guns thing in ET (though to his credit, Spieilberg gave us the original version, so he gets a big thumbs up from me!!) Let me see, the cops are chasing some kids who are with a friggin alien and are riding on a flying bicycle!!! You want to tell me that real-life cops wouldn't have their guns drawn?? But like I said, cheers to Spielberg for realizing that the original, unaltered film should be preserved. Now if only that attitude would rub off on others **COUGH**George Lucas**COUGH**Disney**COUGH**

:)

I think the bottom line is that this is a children's film, and children don't see color - they see other kids. Kids aren't racist until their parents or the media makes them so. I saw someone tell their son he couldn't get a ecko t-shirt because it's "what the black kids wear" and I was blown away...not that I don't have my own racist moments myself (drive through the ghetto every day and see if there are ANY traffic laws...you'd be pissed too...but it's everyone - white black asian arab...just the "lower class structures"...anyways...). So how can this hurt to release this film? You don't see Triumph of the Will banned, do ya??

Disney should sell it to Criterion. Disney's like here's the deal: its yours and don't put our name anywhere on it ok.

Disney should sell it to Criterion. Disney's like here's the deal: its yours and don't put our name anywhere on it ok.

That is a friggin' great idea. I mean, they could just license it to them for a year or so. After all, they licenses Armageddon to them.

I would love it if they did that. I don't care. They should just do something to release it...

I'm so confused now. I guess i'll have to wait if ever to see Song of The South and watch it myself.

Because Zack has made some good points, i just wanted to say again that i was just going by word of mouth and research i think Song of thed South should be released as much as anything.

But like someone said before the only reason why Song of the South is getting this much attention and why so much people want is because its not out. If it was out i woulden't be made as big of deal.

I wish i saw it in 88 when it came in theatres ii don't know why my parents didn't take me, they told me they had never heard of it until i brought it up. Oh well.

It actually came out in 1986 and was a somewhat limited release.

But like someone said before the only reason why Song of the South is getting this much attention and why so much people want is because its not out. If it was out i woulden't be made as big of deal.
You are right about that. We make a big deal about it because it is not out there. Same goes for Star Wars...BUT, the only reason Song of the South is not out is that it has been deemed "inappropriate" by the PC Nazis. The PC cops think it is their job to be the thought police and that they need to protect our fragile little minds from things they think we shouldn't see.

Song of the South is a simple story. Basically, a boy with a disconnected/uninvolved father is taken down to relatives who run a large plantation. He is befriended by Uncle Remus, an elderly black gentleman who becomes a father figure to the young boy. Oh, how racist and horrible is that! :rolleyes: A young white boy who looks up to an elderly black man!! How ridiculous are these PC morons?! I mean, there is nothing racist about that!
In fact, when the young boy becomes sick, the one person he asks for is Uncle Remus! Oh yah, I forgot. The blacks in the film aren't shown to always be wallowing in misery and are actually shown as being occassionally happy. Therefore, it is considered racist. Give me a break. You know, this children's film should have definitely focused on the horrible nature of slavery itself and the sad socio-economic status blacks had to endure instead of portraying them as people who were strong enough to find happiness and peace in the midst of a terrible situation You know, I keep harping on this, but the blind stupidity and arrogance of the PC crowd really gets to me. They really are arrogant. I mean, who the $&(*_$ do they think they are trying to decide what is appropriate for me or anyone else to watch?!?! TV is full of shows and music videos that I think are over the top and unnecessary, but why should I stop someone else from seeing it? Why can the PC crowd not just deal with things they don't wish to see in the same way most people do... If you don't want to see it, don't watch it. How hard is that to comprehend? But no. It is not enough that they not watch it. They have to go out of their way and drop the dreaded "R" (racist) word and try to keep anyone else from seeing it. But I guess I do need a nanny like the wonderful PC gustapo protecting me from myself and all the horrible things I might watch. Oh well, since Song of the South is so dreadfully offensive, I guess I will go spend some quality time watching "artists" "express themselves" ....Off to go watch some MTV rappers talk about beating their "b*tches" and "hos"...but I guess that is OK.... :rolleyes:

Here is an excerpt from SongoftheSouth.net (http://www.songofthesouth.net/home.html) that pretty much sums everything up.
In a world today where sex, drugs, and violence overwhelms and taints the silver screen, it angers me. But alas, that doesn't stop it from being shown. At least Song of the South made an attempt at showing harmony, something I rarely see in today's movies. And not only did it attempt at showing harmony within a family, but harmony between races as well; that was a big accomplishment for a film back in the 1940's when segregation was still very much a part of life. This is my plea, and I don't think I'm alone in this: please bring back Song of the South. I respect the views of those who object to this movie, but I don't think it's fair to prevent those who saw something a bit more positive in it from seeing it and preventing future generations from possibly benefitting in the same way. Imperfect or not, it's still a film, and a relatively harmless one at that.

You can read the full text here. (http://www.songofthesouth.net/movie/overview/defense.html)

Zack

I agree with almost everything that's been said on this board in defense of Song of the South. My family has a PAL conversion and it is a great movie to watch with no hints of racism at all.

In fact: one of the films crucial moments has the sick white kid brought back by Uncle Remus telling him stories and holding his hand. It's very hard to see the image of a little white hand in that of an elderly black one and view it as racist.

article from an older thread
NO DVD RELEASE?

From a January 2003 column at Jim Hill Media.

Given that Buena Vista Home Entertainment is really beginning to scrape the bottom of the barrel when it comes to the Disney film vault (Coming soon from BVHE to a retailer near you: The Don Knotts Collection. As if there are really people out there who are truly desperate to add the DVDs of Gus and The Apple Dumpling Gang Rides Again to their collection), I know that they'd really love to put a title like Song of the South out there in the marketplace. A movie that Disneyana fans and animation buffs have been begging for for years now. A title that would be sure to sell 10-12 million units easy.

But--that said--seriously wonder if Disney will ever dare to put Song of the South out on home video and DVD in Region 1 (i.e. the United States and Canada). I mean, if the former head of Disney Feature Animation Thomas Schumacher is to be believed, SOTS is now supposedly on permanent moratorium.

And what exactly is "permanent moratorium?" Is it the Disney-esque equivalent of Dean Wormer's infamous "Double Secret Probation?" Actually, what "permanent moratorium" supposedly means (in this case, anyway) is that the Walt Disney Company has no intentions to ever put Song of the South back into theatrical release here in the U.S. Nor does the corporation have any plans to release this live action / animated feature in the home video or DVD format here in North America.

Which is unfortunate. Not to mention hypocritical. After all, Disney's Song of the South has been readily available for purchase in the Orient for years now. (Why else do you think that all those video versions of Song of the South that sell on eBay have Japanese subtitles? That's because they're direct dubs off of the SOTS laser disc.)

Why exactly would Disney make Song of the South available for sale in Asia but not in North America? Basically BVHE's international arm believes that there aren't many African-Americans there who would complain about the film's portrayal of blacks.

Which is kind of a two faced policy, don't you think? That Disney pretends to care about the feelings of its black customers here in North America ... then abandons that pretense in the Orient.

But this sadly has become standard operating procedure with the modern Walt Disney Company: to give the impression that the company actually cares about something, rather than actually caring.

This actually reminds me of the last time that Walt Disney Studios put Song of the South out in theaters here in the U.S. That was back in 1986. Just two years after Michael Eisner took control of the Mouse House.

If the Walt Disney Company is really so concerned about the feelings of African Americans, then why did the studio put this allegedly offensive film back into theaters?

Well, actually there's kind of an interesting story associated with that particular re-release of Song of the South. You see, Tony Baxter and the Imagineers who were working on "Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah River Run" (a new flume ride that was being proposed for construction at Disneyland in the late 1980s) were leaning heavily on Eisner to allow them to use the characters and settings from Song of the South to help theme this attraction.

And Uncle Michael actually liked the idea of adding a flume ride to Disneyland. It's just that Disney's CEO was somewhat squeamish about the attraction's proposed subject matter. Eisner was worried that a ride that was built around Uncle Remus might unintentionally offend African-Americans. Which might result in Disneyland being picketed by the NAACP.

Still the Imagineers persisted, insisting that this proposed Disneyland flume ride wouldn't work unless they were allowed to build "Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah River Run"'s storyline around the Song of the South characters and settings.

This is why -- as sort of a litmus test for this attraction -- Eisner ordered that "Song of the South" be put into an extremely limited release in the Fall of 1986. If I'm remembering correctly, the film was only out in theaters for two weeks. Three weeks max. Before "SOTS" was quickly pulled and put back in the vault.

Given that no one wrote to the Walt Disney Company while Song of the South was playing in theaters here in the U.S. to complain about the film's portrayal of its black characters (and--more importantly--given that SOTS actually did pretty well at the box office during its limited re-release), Eisner finally gave the Imagineers the okay to use the movie's characters and settings in their proposed Disneyland flume attraction.

However, just to play it safe, Uncle Michael ordered that all references to Uncle Remus be removed from the ride; that's why the narrator in the queue area is clearly identified as Brer Frog. Eisner also asked that--to further distance this thrill ride from the somewhat controversial Song of the South--that WDI drop the name "Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah River Run" in favor of something a bit more generic. Which is how Disneyland's flume ride ended up being called "Splash Mountain."

Anyway... Rick, you asked me if Disney has any plans to release Song of the South on home video and DVD. Well, given this "permanent moratorium" nonsense, the Mouse is now insisting that this particular film will never ever see the light of day again... at least here in the United States.

Which is really interesting. Given that--as recently as three years ago--Buena Vista Home Entertainment was actively exploring ways they could release SOTS on home video and DVD here in the U.S.

Of course, in order to make this title palatable to the general public during these increasingly politically correct times, BVHE knew that it had to package this film just right. Which is why (for a time) Disney toyed with the idea of selling a version of Song of the South that would have been preceded by a showing of Walt Disney Feature Animation's new short, John Henry.

You see, Buena Vista Home Entertainment's idea was to persuade a prominent African-American like James Earl Jones, Morgan Freeman or Dr. Maya Angelou to serve as the MC on this DVD / home video. Someone who could introduce Song of the South, explaining the film's historical significance as well as re-enforcing the idea that SOTS was a product of a less enlightened time in Hollywood.

Then--once Song of the South finished being shown--the film's host would then introduce John Henry. Which (hopefully) would demonstrate the great strides that the Walt Disney Company had made in its depiction of and attitudes toward African-Americans.

It seemed like a pretty fool-proof scheme. Using the device of a prominent African-American narrator to help put Song of the South in proper perspective. A framework which would (hopefully) make SOTS more palatable (or--at the very least--less distasteful to) African American consumers.

The only problem was... Buena Vista Home Entertainment reportedly approached the wrong African American first. The way I keep hearing this story, the very first person that BVHE went to in their quest to recruit a narrator / host for their Song of the South / John Henry home video and DVD project was poet Maya Angelou. Angelou supposedly loved "John Henry" when WDFA screened the short for her, but was deeply offended by SOTS. The noted author then allegedly told the reps at Buena Vista Home Entertainment that--if they ever dared to put "Song of the South" up for sale in the United States--that she personally would take part in the protests.

That threat was reportedly enough for the Walt Disney Company to order Song of the South back into the vault... never to see the light of day again.

And that framing device that Buena Vista Home Entertainment dreamed up for its proposed Song of the South / John Henry combo release? That concept actually ended up being used on BVHE's American Legends release. That home video and DVD (which was released back in 2001) featured James Earl Jones as its host/narrator. In which the noted African American actor introduced John Henry, Johnny Appleseed, Paul Bunyan and Casey Jones, The Brave Engineer.

Still--as Buena Vista Home Entertainment struggles to find other older Disney film titles to put up for sale on home video and DVD--you have to wonder if the temptation to release Song of the South will eventually become too great. That--even with the outcry from African-Americans that is almost certain to accompany the re-release of this film--that this still could end up being a profitable venture for the Mouse. That-- f BVHE were eventually able to move 10-12 million units of SOTS--that all of the agita and anxiety associated with this movie's home video and DVD release would ultimately be worth it.

My advice, Ryan? Keep an eye on Buena Vista Home Entertainment. If this division of the Walt Disney Company's upcoming releases--Treasure Planet, Atlantis II: Milo's Return, and the colorized version of The Absent Minded Professor--don't exactly set the retail world on fire, BVHE execs may feel that they have no choice but to revisit the company's decision to put SOTS on permanent moratorium.

After all, this was the corporation that said that Disneyland's "Main Street Electric Parade" was "... glowing away forever." So--if that parade can come back to Anaheim--chances are pretty good that Song of the South won't actually be stuck in Disney's film vaults forever.

I would like to see this film released but only for purely academic purposes. I have not seen it (that I know of), but I would like to see if it really is racist or if it could even be seen as racist. I find it hard to believe that almost everyone seems to agree that this film is 100% not racist, yet Disney refuses to release it for that very reason. I would really like to see some sort of commentary on this film by Eisner himself, and maybe some others who could provide some insight onto the racist tones of the film (I'm sure Spike Lee would have a thing or two to say about the film). I would also like to see some sort of commentary by people who would be able to intelligently defend the film (no offense to anyone on here, but several of you are blanket anti-PC, leading me to believe you have more than a biased opinion on the matter and probably not a whole lot of actual knowledge of the history involved in the film). Again, I find it hard to believe that "Zip-a-dee-doo-dah" is a Negro spiritual.

This film seems to have inadvertently become historically significant, and to basically deny its existence is pretty revisionist on Disney's part. If the film truly is racist, it's a sign of the times in which it was made. And to be honest, it's not like racism doesn't exist today. Perhaps Disney is just trying to be a little more responsible in today's political climate. I think that a forced introduction before the film from Eisner himself or maybe someone high up in the NAACP would be sufficient enough a disclaimer.

Well said Fat Tony. This is the first intellectual comment said on this whole thing.

I too have never seen the film and would reallyt like to see it and then i could see for myself.

Before i was going on what other people had told me and what i read, then i heard everones comments on here. And now still not sure where i stand.

Eisner thinks Black Americans are not mature enough to watch Song of the South. The film was recently broadcasted on UK television. As a Black person I find it insulting that Eisner thinks if I see Song of the South or an old-fashioned Black stereotype in Fantasia that I will try to start a riot in Disney world like a monkey.

The main problem Eisner has with the film is Uncle Remus is basically Uncle Tom. The film takes place after the civil war so there are no slaves in the film. Eisner is a big ass hole that wants to edit history to his liking. Eisner has also edited out smoking from several of Walt’s films. He did those edits without Roy Disney's permission.

I will not buy a region 1 release of Song of the South because I know Eisner will have some ass hole talking down to me during the intro of the movie. So I will wait for the Japanese DVD release

The thing is that now, unlike VHS and LD days, its much easier to import movies from outside the United States. And even Region encoding is not a problem with DVDs, so I doubt will see a release outside Region 1.

If they ever release it, it will probably be across the globe.

Originally posted by JoeyOhhhh
The thing is that now, unlike VHS and LD days, its much easier to import movies from outside the United States. And even Region encoding is not a problem with DVDs, so I doubt will see a release outside Region 1.

If they ever release it, it will probably be across the globe.

The film aired on UK television last month so I think it is safe to assume Eisner thinks only Black Americans shouldn't see it. I think we will see a UK DVD release of Song of the South soon. I highly doubt any idiot that would be offended by the movie has a multi region DVD player or knows where to buy import movies.

Originally posted by FatTony
II would really like to see some sort of commentary on this film by Eisner himself, and maybe some others who could provide some insight onto the racist tones of the film (I'm sure Spike Lee would have a thing or two to say about the film).

Eisner doing commentary?? NO THANK YOU!! :crap: I do not want this piece of filth running amuck in any DVDs I'm supposed to pay $$$ for!!!! Leonard Maltin is annoying enough but tolerable to a certain degree, but EISNER??????? HELL NO!!!!

but several of you are blanket anti-PC, leading me to believe you have more than a biased opinion on the matter and probably not a whole lot of actual knowledge of the history involved in the film). [/B]

anti-PC to the very end and proud of it :beer:

/me pets his DVD of "The Alamo", among others.

FatTony,

You are right. I am unashamedly anti-PC. I hate it. I think it is absolutely absurd. I admit that no one can argue the racial undertones of the film. It was based on the stories of Joel Chandler Harris, whose own racial ideas are questionable to say the least. I am not trying to say that the film is perfectly innocent. No, "Zippa Dee Do Dah" is not a Negro spiritual. I just think that many people have a problem that the film shows former slave/servants being joyful at all. I think that is insulting to them and their legacy. I would welcome the film being released with commentaries (though not Eisner!) that tell intelligently and ACCURATELY the story behind the movie and all the controversy. That would be awesome. I would want them to be unbiased and accurate though. I just think that it is a bit ridiculous that SotS has so much controverrsy, when other films that show racial issues in the same light are OK...

Perhaps Disney is just trying to be a little more responsible in today's political climate.
That's exactly what I am saying. The hyper-sensitive political climate sucks. There would be nothing "irresponsible" about releasing it. Are Matt and Trey "irresponsible" for releasing South Park? Are Eminem or Dr. Drey irresponsible? It is not up to some PC-police to decide what is "appropriate." Unfortunately, in today's climate, many groups like the Rainbow/PUSH like to cry racism over EVERYTHING and extort organizations into doing what they want.
Eisner thinks Black Americans are not mature enough to watch Song of the South. The film was recently broadcasted on UK television. As a Black person I find it insulting that Eisner thinks if I see Song of the South or an old-fashioned Black stereotype in Fantasia that I will try to start a riot in Disney world like a monkey.

You could not be more right about that. Except, I think it is not only directed at black people. The PC crowd thinks that Americans can not handle and should not see things that they think are offensive.

Anyways, I think it will be released eventually...probably in the way Tony says too, with commentaries. Oh, and there would have to be some forced thing you had to watch EVERY TIME you played the movie that not only explained the time and environment in which the film was made, but also a huge disclaimer like: Disney Exec: "Oh, we are so sorry for ever producing this horrible, dreadful thing. We are releasing it only for it's historical value. We hope that by releasing it we are not crushing anyone's fragile little universe. Please do not boycott is and call us the dreaded 'R' word." And then some Rainbow/PUSH guy would come on: "We think this film is offensive and horrible, and you should not be seeing it. We have deemed you to be too immature and unintelligent, but Disney has received a large demand for this film's release and they want to release it. So, they have agreed (thanks to our extortion-like threats) to donate 1/2 the money that they make to us...and well, money talks. So, umm, watch this film, and just remember how horrible it is and that we, your friendly neighborhood thought police highly recommend against it." Oh well. It will certainly be interesting to see how they handle it when/if it is released. :)

I love this "us vs. them" mentality surrounding the arguments over political correctness.

Political correctness may rub some of you the wrong way, but it serves its purpose in some cases; and in some cases it goes too far. But it is not an ideology, as some of you are characterizing it.

In any case, Disney owns the film, and if they don't want to release it - it's their business (or loss, IMO).

So much energy invested in railing against a corporation over a DVD release... Not my bag, I guess.

Umm, Political correctness "is not an ideology, as some of you are characterizing it." Go look up ideology in a dictionary, then get back to me.

It is absolutely ridiculous that studios can release much more controversial films" such as "jesus Christ Superstar" and "The Last Temptation of Christ". In JCS, There are three women who look like strippers dancing over Jesus as he carries his cross to calvary. In TLTOC, religious conservatives "flipped their whigs" because the ending shows Jesus' last temptaion has having sex with Mary Magdeline(a prostitute). From what I know its supposedly a "dream sequence" that he has. I have to say if the same film was about the life of Mohammad, this never would have happened(just look at what happened to Salman Rusdie when he wrote "The Satanic Verse"). Both of these films offended me, but it doesn't mean I feel they should be banned. I just won't watch them again.
But to not release a classic story like Song of the South, that in my viewpoint shows African -Americans in a less subserveient role than in "Gone with The Wind" is utterly ridiculous. This classic film, deals with friendship between a young white boy and Uncle Remus(never once is it even mentioned he is a slave!!!!). If anything I found the film to be filled with messages of positivity, togetherness and racial EQUALITY.

Originally posted by Dalvin
I have to say if the same film was about the life of Mohammad, this never would have happened(just look at what happened to Salman Rusdie when he wrote "The Satanic Verse").

Very well said

Alright, after much hunting and hours of downloading, I have been able to see the second half of Song of the South. My official opinion is that the film is indeed a racist one. It presents black people as uneducated and mostly as simple servants to the white people. Whether or not the word "slave" is actually used in the film seems trivial. Not only that, but it presents them as being happy about it. The film also seems to have a skewed perspective of history as well, which in itself is irresponsible.

Is the film awful in its entirety? Tough to say, as I've only seen the last half of it, but I would have to say probably not. The relationship between Uncle Remus and the children is quite touching and from a technical standpoint, the animation is quite good as are the scenes with both live action and animation together.

I'm sure the film was also considered quite forward-thinking and open-minded at the time it was made, which presents a problem. Just because the slaves were freed after the Civil War, it doesn't mean that discrimination and racism ceased to exist. This is where the skewed perspective of history comes in. It completely removes the reality of the situation at the time. I realize that the film portrays people interacting with cartoons, but that's beside the point. To portray this period of American history as anything different from the truth is disrespectful. It's disrespectful to the people who lived in that era, it's disrespectful to the people who have worked over the years to change society for the better, and it's disrespectful to any audience who has ever seen the film, as they are being lied to, plain and simple.

Now, just to make this post less of an off-topic rant, should Disney release this on DVD? Most definitely. Love the film or hate it, there is absolutely no reason for this film to not be released. In a time when such controversial films as Birth of a Nation, Happiness, and The Last Temptation of Christ are readily available on DVD, there is no logical reason why Song of the South should not join their ranks. I can only hope that if/when Disney chooses to release it, they do so responsibly, including interviews and commentaries from people who are able to eloquently argue for and against this film. Perhaps licensing this film to Criterion would be the best move on their part, as it will likely carry a substantially higher price tag than most of Dinsey's own DVDs and would therefore prevent the everyday family from picking this film up, reserving it for die-hard fans and those who would actually like to study this film (not to mention that Criterion would probably do a much better job with the special features).

And for those who vomited at my suggestion of having Eisner on the DVD, I only brought it up because it seems to me it was his decision to put the film on permanent moratorium. I just thought it would be good for him to back up his original decision and why he changed his mind later down the road.

Originally posted by FatTony
Is the film awful in its entirety? Tough to say, as I've only seen the last half of it, but I would have to say probably not. The relationship between Uncle Remus and the children is quite touching and from a technical standpoint, the animation is quite good as are the scenes with both live action and animation together.


While the animated sequences are well done, and Remus is a wonderful character, overall SOTS is a very poorly made movie. The cast (again, with the exception of Remus) is cardboard, the acting is atrocious, and the cinematography is more like an early 1930's movie. In short, the film looks incredibly dated, and I suspect Disney is afraid it would not play well with todays more sophisticated kids.

It's a shame, too, because the animated sequences are downright charming, and the interaction of Remus and the birds is damn well done by any standard.

Now, just to make this post less of an off-topic rant, should Disney release this on DVD? Most definitely. Love the film or hate it, there is absolutely no reason for this film to not be released. In a time when such controversial films as Birth of a Nation, Happiness, and The Last Temptation of Christ are readily available on DVD, there is no logical reason why Song of the South should not join their ranks. I can only hope that if/when Disney chooses to release it, they do so responsibly, including interviews and commentaries from people who are able to eloquently argue for and against this film. Perhaps licensing this film to Criterion would be the best move on their part, as it will likely carry a substantially higher price tag than most of Dinsey's own DVDs and would therefore prevent the everyday family from picking this film up, reserving it for die-hard fans and those who would actually like to study this film (not to mention that Criterion would probably do a much better job with the special features).

Tony, that sounds totally reasonable to me, man. I especially like the thought of Criterion licensing the film. That would be perfect. As I said, there are definite racial overtones in the film. The time period it portrays was a racist one where blacks were made to be subservient and inferior to whites. There is no denying that. As you said, I just think it is a shame that it is hidden away while equally or more controversial films are considered OK. Anyways, cheers to you for taking the time to seek it out and decide for yourself. :)

Take Care,
Zack

Originally posted by FatTony
Alright, after much hunting and hours of downloading, I have been able to see the second half of Song of the South. My official opinion is that the film is indeed a racist one. It presents black people as uneducated and mostly as simple servants to the white people. Whether or not the word "slave" is actually used in the film seems trivial. Not only that, but it presents them as being happy about it. The film also seems to have a skewed perspective of history as well, which in itself is irresponsible.

I'm sure the film was also considered quite forward-thinking and open-minded at the time it was made, which presents a problem. Just because the slaves were freed after the Civil War, it doesn't mean that discrimination and racism ceased to exist. This is where the skewed perspective of history comes in. It completely removes the reality of the situation at the time. I realize that the film portrays people interacting with cartoons, but that's beside the point. To portray this period of American history as anything different from the truth is disrespectful. It's disrespectful to the people who lived in that era, it's disrespectful to the people who have worked over the years to change society for the better, and it's disrespectful to any audience who has ever seen the film, as they are being lied to, plain and simple.


Well, I must say I'm surprised at this reaction. I recently downloaded the film, and absolutely loved it. *Nothing* racist at all in it. In fact, the black characters are the *positive* characters in the film, and it's the whites that are mean, unlikable and the boo hiss villains.

In your first paragraph, you've jumped from the depiction of a specific group of black men and women, and generalized to the entire race. The film also shows a
"white trash" family who are uneducated, does that mean all whites are this way? Of course not. So why would the depiction of certain black folks being uneducated mean that the film is saying all blacks are this way?

The film shows individuals. It's not talking about race, ever.

I also disagree with the second paragraph. How does the film show that racism doesn't exist? There's nothing of the kind there. The mother sure isn't that kind to Uncle Remus the whole film, and tries to keep her son away from him. Remember, much racism is not overt and obvious. And even if there is no racism shown in the film, you can't generalise outside the individuals shown.

As for not accurately depicting events, welcome to Hollywood. You'd eliminate 99% of all films if you forced them into accurate depictions of history. Cop films? Westerns? Romantic comedies? Science Fiction? All gone, all unrealistic.

I know you're not saying the film should be banned, but why should this film be put under the burden of realism, when no others are? And I believe you're vastly overstating the amount of unrealism in the film.

Thanks Fat Tony thats what i kinda thought. And i had been saying the same thing that changing history like that is wrong and irresponcible not to mention upsetting for people. That's why Disney hasn't released this and probably won't

Originally posted by Which Button?
Thanks Fat Tony thats what i kinda thought. And i had been saying the same thing that changing history like that is wrong and irresponcible not to mention upsetting for people. That's why Disney hasn't released this and probably won't

What History is changed in this film? You have this movie confused with Pocahontas. Roy Disney wants to release Song of the South it is that ass hole Eisner who will not release it.

And i had been saying the same thing that changing history like that is wrong and irresponcible not to mention upsetting for people.
Well, excuse my horrible insensitivity, but I don't care if a movie offends someone. I really don't. If it is released, will Disney somehow force everyone to watch it?? No. There are movies out their that I think are offensive. I don't care that they are out there though. I am an adult. I can easily choose to not watch it. So what if I would find it offensive? I just choose to not watch it. If I thought Eminem were personally offensive to me (which I really don't), I would NOT support keeping his music hidden away just because I might be offended. We can be adults. We can choose for ourselves. We do not need to be "protected." Does anyone not think that "Birth of a Nation" could be considered offensive? It is considered OK though. Very strange indeed. And as far as changing history - it is OK for Oliver Stone and everyone else to do it, but not Disney?
If I were Disney though, I can see their being nervous about it being released. I am sure there is some group out there who would love to boycott, sue them, or call them racist or whatever. If I find something offensive, then I boycott it with my wallet - I refuse to buy it. Why can't others just do the same? Why do we need to have a small part of society (the PC crowd) that thinks it is their lot in life to tell others what is appropriate to watch and what they should be offended by? Don't they have anything better to do?

Hey Man don't jump on my back I want this film out too and i think there's no reason even if it's racist it shoulden't be out.

I was just stating why its probably never going to be out and even Fat Tony said "The film also seems to have a skewed perspective of history as well, which in itself is irresponsible. To portray this period of American history as anything different from the truth is disrespectful. It's disrespectful to the people who lived in that era, it's disrespectful to the people who have worked over the years to change society for the better, and it's disrespectful to any audience who has ever seen the film, as they are being lied to, plain and simple."

Hey Man don't jump on my back I want this film out too and i think there's no reason even if it's racist it shoulden't be out.
My apolgies, man. Seriously. None of my comments were directed at you personally. I was referring to the general notion that a film should not be seen because it is "offensive" or "historically inaccurate." I hate political correctness in all forms and it just gets under my skin.
BUT, I meant absolutely nothing I said to be directed at you personally. I am sorry if it came across that way. :)

Na no worries man its cool. I hate all this PC stuff too i started noticing it after 9-11 What got me upset is when i heard the Disney Channel in the States were editing Spider-Man, DuckTales & Darkwing Duck for violence. I mean C'mon don't mess with cartoons already made especially ones that are so non voilent as those. The only thing i could understand being edited out would if there was a terrorist on a plane or something. But just because there are explosions kids aren't gunna start having nightmares.

It will be very interesting to see what happens with this title. Disney is kind of in the position ABC is in after John Ritter's death. You have to walk the thin line of running a buisness and not trying to offend anyone. I think Disney is not selling this to another company, because they know how valuable a gem it is for them to have. Don't think they don't know they're sitting on a gold mine. Disney's thinking is, "Nobody is going to make money of walt's film except us, and we don't want to offend, so it will never see the light of day."
Sadly enough I'd like Eisner to step down, I wish no ill will on the man, but he is completely loathed in that company. I've been to Disneyland, and people have been saying what a "greedy A---hole he is." I have spoken with a head Animator at Disney who says he is a "greedy control freek, who doesn't even understand what Disney is about". Nobody likes this guy. To quote the great Chris Tucker:
"She don't like you/I don't like you/ the girl don't like you/ nobody likes you"

I wish Roy Disney Jr. was running the company

Keep repeating, "It's only a movie...."

http://www.snopes.com/disney/films/sots.htm

It is not just, "ONLY a Movie", it is a landmark film, and Micheal Eisner is murdering walt Disney's dream. I read an article in the L.A. times about SOTS a few months ago, and they mentioned they made some very good points, If someone knows what I'm talking about, can you please post the article....it was a great article

Originally posted by Dalvin
It is not just, "ONLY a Movie", it is a landmark film, and Micheal Eisner is murdering walt Disney's dream. I read an article in the L.A. times about SOTS a few months ago, and they mentioned they made some very good points, If someone knows what I'm talking about, can you please post the article....it was a great article

No, from goodburger to the Godfather, they're all only a movie.

Originally posted by Dalvin
Micheal Eisner is murdering walt Disney's dream.

Well, from reading that article, it sounds to me like Walt Disney murdered Joel Chandler Harris's stories.

Originally posted by Onizuka
What History is changed in this film? You have this movie confused with Pocahontas. Roy Disney wants to release Song of the South it is that ass hole Eisner who will not release it.

This post is completely uncalled for. It's one thing to ask for clarification on what history may have been changed, but it's another to inisinuate that both Which Button? and, by extension, myself have mistaken Song of the South for another film. I can only speak for myself, but I know that Song of the South does not portray the times it is supposed to take place in accurately. I do not have it mistaken for Pocahontas. It's a shame that this post had to appear in an otherwise very civilized and intelligent discussion.

Now, the part of that article that really gets me is that at the end it says James Haskett was the first actor to have ever been hired by Disney, yet he couldn't attend the premiere because no hotel in Atlanta would give him a room. Oh sweet irony. The film takes place in a fantasy world right after the Civil War where slavery has been abolished and blatant, out-in-the-open racism doesn't seem to exist, yet this man can not get a room in the very same city in which the film takes place almost 100 years later! Ridiculous!!! Disney apparently didn't put up much of a fight for him either.

Now, to Feathers McGraw, you contradict yourself in your post. You first say there is "*Nothing* racist at all in it" and yet you go on to criticize me by saying "How does the film show that racism doesn't exist?" I'm not sure what you're getting at here. But you're right, not all racism is overt and obvious, but the mother trying to keep her son away from Uncle Remus is not what I would call subtle racism.

You also mention that I generalize the characters in the film. Do I know for a fact that all black people in the world at the time this film takes place are slaves? No. But as far as I can tell, all the black people shown on the screen are involved in some sort of master-slave relationship. And on the other hand, we have the "white trash" family. Is this the only white family in the film? No. The other white family seems to be well-off financially. So in the end, the white people are given multiple characterizations, while the black people are only there to serve the white.

And finally, when I'm watching a historical film, I like to see that historical period portrayed accurately. Having a movie that takes place when racism runs rampant not show the racism of the time accurately bothers me. It reminds me of a few films of recent years: Remember the Titans and Men of Honor. These films deal with the subject of racism, yet they both bothered me because they didn't show what I felt should have been a level of racism relevant to the stories. Does this mean I should alienate 99% of what Hollywood puts out? I don't think so.

Originally posted by FatTony
I like to see that historical period portrayed accurately

Then do yourself a favor and watch documentaries.

The film Song of the South is not a movie about Racism & Slavery. It is a movie about friendship pure and simple. Do you also get angry when movies that are set in 1950's America don't show the racism & Communist hunts of the time? Why is it only this film is singled out? If you want to see films about slavery or racism I suggest you watch Roots, Spartacus or anouther film.

Please stop trying to protect me from Song of the South.

Originally posted by Onizuka
Please stop trying to protect me from Song of the South.
Take 2 minutes to read my posts and find out that I have never at any point said that this film should not be released on DVD. Thanks!

I personally don't understand why everyone gets so upset about it not being offically avaliable on DVD. I say offically because I have a great copy of it on DVD.
I look at it this way.
If you really want the movie on DVD it's avaliable for you. One top of that Disney (the "a$$holes" who won't release the movie) will not be getting any of your money for it.
If you think the move should never see the light of day feel happy that you and most of the other casual "Best Buy shoppers" will never discover this travisty sitting on a shelf next to decent classic family entainment.

Ok i fnally saw Song of the South last night its a really good movie i love the animations parts with B'rear Rabbit, Fox & Bear. So good and i love Uncle Remus i love his laugh. Its great to finally understand the Splash Mountain ride and the Zipededoodah song that i liked as a kid.

The movie though is racist because they never say when the movie takes place. Not once do they say wheather or not its after or before the civil war. And it gives the impression that there fairly happy people working on the plantation without any other thoughts. I think people miss that because its really a good movie and thats the only problem why its not released. If they had given a time line and included the other parts of what was going on it would be ok. Most people seem to miss that point while movies like Gone in the Wind and others clearly give a time frame to when the movie takes place.

It be like doing a movie today aboit the Concentration Camps and only portraying the Jews as being happy content people about the situation and not talking about or mentiong the time it took place or what was really happening to them. If they did a movie like that today it get the same treatment as Song of the South even it wasn't made by Disney.

Yes the PC thing is a big part of and peaople are PC crazy and bash and ban things without using their Full brain but i don't think that's this film main problem.

Something that Disney never seems to point out is that this is the first time, in which a black man is a central part of the Movie. This is incredible consdering the film was from 1947!!!!!!! In fact, Walt Disney himself has even said its one of his greatest accomplishements, mainly because its the first time the integrate live action with animation.
Disney has everything planned to come out soon or in the near future that is of any value.....EXCEPT THIS MOVIE!!!!!! If this does come out, In Region 1, with extras. I think Roy Disney Jr.(who I wish was running the company) should do an introduction to the film. He's Walt's nephew and the only person I think who should introduce the film, he can speak and talk about his Uncle's vision. Nobody knows more about Walt's legacy that is still alive today than Roy Disney Jr.(who badly wants to release "Song of the South"
Please go to http://www.songofthesouth.net and petition to Disney for them to finally release this classic film. This is an insult to everything Walt Disney stands for. make your voice be known to the powers that be, so they will have no choice but to release, in my opinion, one of Disney's landmark films.

Please, if you have not seen the film, sign the petiton, if you have seen the film, sign the petition. We need as many people pushing and calling and writing e-mails and pestering Disney to get this DVD released. I would love to send a personal letter/e-mail to Micheal Eisner(anyone know how). It's just wrong, when we as a country become so sensitive that a lovely sweet film like "Song of the South" becomes offensive to people. Even a memeber who is still alive today from the cast said, "If Walt Disney were alive, I think I could convince him to release it". Please, don't let Walt's vision die, respect the man, you and I can do this and make it happen, if we just push and push, and keep at it. With your help I know we can get "Song of the Song" released on Region 1 DVD. Please help and sign the petition at http://www.songofthesouth.net. Thanks

Originally posted by Which Button?
Ok i fnally saw Song of the South last night its a really good movie i love the animations parts with B'rear Rabbit, Fox & Bear. So good and i love Uncle Remus i love his laugh. Its great to finally understand the Splash Mountain ride and the Zipededoodah song that i liked as a kid.

The movie though is racist because they never say when the movie takes place. Not once do they say wheather or not its after or before the civil war. And it gives the impression that there fairly happy people working on the plantation without any other thoughts. I think people miss that because its really a good movie and thats the only problem why its not released. If they had given a time line and included the other parts of what was going on it would be ok. Most people seem to miss that point while movies like Gone in the Wind and others clearly give a time frame to when the movie takes place.

It be like doing a movie today aboit the Concentration Camps and only portraying the Jews as being happy content people about the situation and not talking about or mentiong the time it took place or what was really happening to them. If they did a movie like that today it get the same treatment as Song of the South even it wasn't made by Disney.

Yes the PC thing is a big part of it and people are PC crazy and bash and ban things without using their Full brain but i don't think that's this film main problem.

I say what i said before.

Maybe Disney should license it over to Criterion(Won't happen) but it would be a much better disc I guarantee you of that. There must be something Disney can do. This title is not banned, but is on "permanent moratoreum". There are very few "HolY Grails" left, and I have to say that even with "Star Wars" , I have to say this is the "Ultimate Holy Grail" that has yet to be released/or have a release date in sight. I will be so happy to get this film finally released, and it will happen. It may take some time, but I will not let this thread die, I will not let Walt Disney down, and I will keep posting and calling and e-mailing, until this wonderful story is told once again.......ON DVD!!!!(Can you imagine. "Song of the South" video fully restored. OAR!!!!!!! Dolby Digital 5.1 and possibly a DTS soundtrack!!!!!!!!!) O.K I need to come back from Heaven now.

now watch, when and if this movie ever does get released, everyone will probably say "whats so bad about that?" when they get a chance to watch.

People will say that when the film is released. Again, go to that website I have indicated and please sign the petition. The gentelman that runs the website, is a dedicated fan of the movie and he is really pushing to get the film released. Please help the cause. We can do this, if NEARLY ALL dvd talkers help and sign and fight as strongly as I've fought. It will take alot of pressure to do this,but Disney is starting tyo get hounded by over 300 e-mails everyday in regards to this, pounded with e-mailes, and numerous calls about the subject. Believe me, thiswill get released. It WILL happen, but I need your help.

I've signed it as i really would like Song of the South on DVD. It is an awesome movie. But it is racist, please read my post before to see what i meant.

I'm in agreement with you that this film is a timeless classic, and needs to be released. I have seen the film(I own the Japanse Laserdisc of it before they discontinued it) and I have to say that while you may feel that the film , "is racist" as you have said. I totally disagree. In fact, many of my friends who are African-American find the film to be filled with wonderful symbolism and rich history. The film is interpreted to be "racist" because in today's society, we look at everything under a microscope, and we analyze everything. What about every African-American rapper that says, "Nigga or ******" that music is targeted towards young adults. In many ways, that music is racist towards the very culture it represents. Walt Disney did the unthinkable, when he hired a black gentleman as the lead in the film in 1949! IN fact, his pay that he received from that filom was morte than TRIPLE, yes, TRIPLE that of the WHITE actors. But this is off, topic and Idon't like playing the "race card", because I think its utterly foolish. We all are People, who are brought up in life, some are more prividleged than others, and some have to fight there way more to make it. This film showed both types in society and should be commended for its ability to take risks and push the social and political barriers of its time, instead of being snubbed at because of its "SUPPOSED" lack of politcal correctness.
I greatly await the day that this will be released. Possible 2007 release date? That would mark the 60th anniversary of the film? It would be a nice nod to Walt Disney, and the company to do to this, but I won't get my hopes up. Alsom there are two actual annimators who are still alive that worked on the film!!!! "Frank and Olie Johnson are their names I believe. It would be great to get some interviews with these two living legends to put on the evetual DVD release before they die. And figuring these guys are in their late 80's, I would figure it won't be much longer. I sure hope somebody has interviewed these two gentleman about their involvement with the film, otherwise I will be very dissapointed with Disney

I think you keep missing the point its not the fact that all those great factors happened. I mean the movie should be released just on the points you made. Because your right for that time it was incredible.

But they didn't have a time frame for the movie that's what's so offensive and racist about the movie they never say when the film takes place, what's the postion if there slaves or not you just see these black slaves singing and dancing that's the bad part and why it's probably not released.

In a province called Alberta in Canada there was a school teacher who taught his students the Holocaust never happened and that millions of Jews are lieing. You know how offensive that is? Well if you don't it's one of the most offensive things ever.

The Song of the South situation is similar if they had only had a correct timeline and a postion on the black people if they were slaves or not i'd doubt there would be a problem with the film.

dood! I like signed the petition and I'm like w00t! teh interweb voice will be heard cause Online petitions like ROCK!

...dildo for me too!!! :D

Originally posted by Which Button?

But they didn't have a time frame for the movie that's what's so offensive and racist about the movie they never say when the film takes place, what's the postion if there slaves or not you just see these black slaves singing and dancing that's the bad part and why it's probably not released.


Your definition makes virtually <i>all</I> movies made in the last 100 years "racist."

Originally posted by Dalvin
Please go to http://www.songofthesouth.net and petition to Disney for them to finally release this classic film. This is an insult to everything Walt Disney stands for. make your voice be known to the powers that be, so they will have no choice but to release, in my opinion, one of Disney's landmark films.

Historically, not a single thing was ever achieved via Internet petitions.

Originally posted by Dalvin
Even a memeber who is still alive today from the cast said, "If Walt Disney were alive, I think I could convince him to release it".

Only two of the cast are still alive today. Miss Sally and the Black boy.

Originally posted by Dalvin
(Can you imagine. "Song of the South" video fully restored. OAR!!!!!!! Dolby Digital 5.1 and possibly a DTS soundtrack!!!!!!!!!)

By the way what is the OAR? I’ve heard conflicting reports.

Originally posted by Which Button?
But they didn't have a time frame for the movie that's what's so offensive and racist about the movie they never say when the film takes place, what's the postion if there slaves or not you just see these black slaves singing and dancing that's the bad part and why it's probably not released.

The blacks are not slaves.

If you remember when Uncle Remus wants to leave he’s leaving by his own free will and no one tells him anything. There’s the proof right there!

Everybody is assuming that the objections to the movie are PC crusades against racist depictions of Uncle Remus and so on, but it's a lot more complex than that. There's a lot of anti-PC rhetoric being tossed around in this thread, but none of it addresses the real issues at hand.

If anybody really wants to understand why many people have bad feelings about this film then read Alice Walker's "The Dummy in the Window".

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0156528657/qid=1064735057/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-2758172-7555317?v=glance&s=books

Excerpt: "I believe that the worst part of being in an oppressed culture is that the oppressive culture--primarily because it controls the production and dispersal of images in the media--can so easily make us feel ashamed of ourselves, of our sayings, our doings, and our ways. And it doesn't matter whether these sayings, doings, or ways are good or bad. What is bad about them and, therefore, worthy of shame, is that they belong to us. Even our folklore has been ridiculed and tampered with. And this is very serious, because folklore is at the heart of self-expression and therefore at the heart of self-acceptance."

Of course we can look at Song of the South today and say that it isn't inherently racist (because it isn't!), but that ignores the real objections that people have to the film.

Originally posted by Class316
...
By the way what is the OAR? I’ve heard conflicting reports.
...

I don't know why there should be conflicting reports. It was released in 1946, years before widescreen became the norm. OAR is the standard Academy Ratio, 1.37:1.

http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0038969/technical

Thank you to all of the people who are signing the petition. A gentleman above me said something to the effect of, "Historically nothing ever has come from internet petitions". Well, What about "Star Wars"? This film MIGHT get a release in 2004, and if that happens, you can thank the fans who have pestered and begged and screamed, because the fans really do help to pursuade the studios whether or not these titles get released ahead of schedule. First off, I do think we can get "Song of the South" on DVD, but it is going to take a push like no other push(you thought trying to get "Star Wars" on DVD early was hard....you haven't seen anything yet). This will have to be the "Mother of all internet petitions" I have already called Disney about this.I call them them, I write e-mails, I write letters. If people just keep hounding this company we will get it released.
I also think turning the "race card" against Disney, by someone who is a minority might also work. Calling Disney "Racist for NOT releasing the film, and sharing a part of African-American heritage with the world". The really listen and don't want to offend anyone, so if they see that African-American people(and there would have to be a heck of a lot) complaining about this, then that might work into our advantage.

For all you "die-hard" "Song of the South" fans like myself. This is the number directly to Buena Vista Home Entertainment. They handle all requests dealing with "Song of the South" being released on DVD. The number is 1-800-723-4763. Let's keep this petition alive, and PLEASE CALL and let your voice be heard. I think Walt Diseny has rolled over enough times in his grave.

Gee, the Star Wars films would NEVER be released on DVD if people on web sites hadn't begged for it.

Read:

http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/petition/internet.htm

For all those cowering in fear over political correctness running amock and destroying our cultural values by censoring this movie, please answer this one question?

Just where is the public outrage over this movie, anyhow?

I'm always hearing tales of terror regarding the big, bad, PC boogieman, so I decided to see just what it was that bothered these folks so much.

Now, this is hardly scientific or complete, but google searches can quickly reveal a lot. Using the phrase "song of the south criticism" no relevant links were found, unless you count one user comment on a disney ride review site that simply said it's a shame the characters aren't known to young children.

Using the phrase "song of the south protest" the only relevant link was the following

http://www.museumca.org/picturethis/4_9.html

Which is an article on a protest against this film when it was released in 1947.

"Song of the South Political Correctness" reveals many relevant hits, but they are all decrying the "censorship". I could find no site where someone comes right out and says, "We think this should not be released and here's why." If there is such a force behind the censoring of this movie, they're pretty damn quiet about it. Plenty of people want to censor Eminem, and it's very easy to find their position.

I'm not surprised. Like i've said they have alot of mixed messages in this movie and that's what's so racist about it. I know alot of you don't see it but it is theres no mention of their postions if there slaves or free and the time if it takes place before of after the cival war. Once again that's what's so racist. about it.

LIke i've said before try having a film released today about the Jews in the Concentration Camps no mention of their postion or when the film takes place and you see them happy, singing and dancing. And that film would get the same treatment as Song of the South.

Uh Class i know it dosen't look like the Blacks are slaves because they skirted around it and never ever said slaves. But they are. And Uncle Remus ran away and you usually don't ask for permission to run away. Aunt Tempy came with them just to cook supper for fun because she's their friend huh?

Originally posted by movielib
I don't know why there should be conflicting reports. It was released in 1946, years before widescreen became the norm. OAR is the standard Academy Ratio, 1.37:1.

http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0038969/technical

Songofthesouth.net reports it to be 1.75:1

so if it's 1.37:1 does that mean the LD/VHS OAR?

Originally posted by Which Button?
And Uncle Remus ran away and you usually don't ask for permission to run away. Aunt Tempy came with them just to cook supper for fun because she's their friend huh?

He wasn't running away. He was just going.

Song of the South is an Academy Ratio film.

Disney didn't use 1.75:1 until the late 1950's on certain films (besides their CinemaScope and Technirama productions).

oh, and http://www.mechanicalarts.com/songsouth.html :lol:

I think it will come out. Especially if you call that number and hound them emphatically regarding this. I am devoting alot of time and effort to getting this picture released. Continue to fight the system and this can be done.
I am HOPING and PRAYING that we can pursuage Disney to finally release this in 2007, marking the 60th anniversary of the film. It would be a great time to release it(now would be even better, but it won't happen)

So I guess that those of you still fumbling around in the dark trying to figure out what's so "racist" about SOTS or trying to figure out where the outrage is didn't bother to read my post above?

Nope didn't you know Spinner people don't actually read the posts they just rant and rave that Song of the South isn't released yet and continally say it's not Racist.

Patience, mar friends. Since Tom & Jerry is being released in 2004 complete and uncensored, I have faith that Song of the South will follow suit.

Originally posted by Buttmunker
Patience, mar friends. Since Tom & Jerry is being released in 2004 complete and uncensored, I have faith that Song of the South will follow suit.

Those are two completely different things. The controversy surrounding Song of the South is far more complex and troubling than Tom & Jerry's "mammy" stereotypes.

Originally posted by Buttmunker
Tom & Jerry is being released in 2004 complete and uncensored

Complete, maybe. But uncensored? That has yet to be seen.

I'm unfamilar with Tom & Jerry mostly other then knowing their name. What was so bad about it?

Originally the lady who looked after Tom & Jerry was a black lady named "Mammy Two-Shoes" whose face you never saw (in fact all you SAW of her were her lower legs, kinda like "Nanny" on Muppet Babies). Apperently MGM redid Mammy's animation to make her legs a lighter color and dubbed over Mammy's black dialect with an Irish one. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to songofthesouth.net to sign that petition.

Originally posted by Class316
Songofthesouth.net reports it to be 1.75:1
That has to be wrong. Virtually all movies made before 1952 or 1953 were 1.37:1 (there were a few "experiments" with other aspect ratios earlier but not many). There's no reason this film should have been any different. If it were, it would be famous for it.
so if it's 1.37:1 does that mean the LD/VHS OAR?
Yes. they are OAR.

I just called Buena Vista and they told me, "We are aware of the continued persitence among fans for this film to be released. We have been bombarded with calls and are reevaluating plans to POSSIBLY revisit this title in the future"

She said....POSSIBLY REVIST......Hmmmm.....maybe their are plans, but they won't release any info at this time.


Again, try ebay.com and see if you can buy a Japansese Laserdisc of it, to see for yourself this film is not in any way racist.

Originally posted by Dalvin
Again, try ebay.com and see if you can buy a Japansese Laserdisc of it, to see for yourself this film is not in any way racist.

Screw a bulky expensive LD! Get it on DVD.

Originally posted by Dalvin
...see if you can buy a Japansese Laserdisc of it, to see for yourself this film is not in any way racist.

Can't you at least pretend to have read and to have considered the viewpoints of those people who object to the movie? Yes, you can look at the movie and say that it isn't racist, but you're completely ignoring the real reasons why it is even an issue. You're looking for bug-eyed Stepin Fetchits and other stereotypes, but that's not what people are objecting to in Song of the South. To understand why people like Alice Walker have a problem with the movie, you need drop the knee-jerk anti-PC agenda and look beyond the film's surface. Your repeated statements about the film's lack of racist depictions makes it clear that you simply aren't taking into account anything beyond that surface.

Originally posted by SpinnerX
Can't you at least pretend to have read and to have considered the viewpoints of those people who object to the movie? Yes, you can look at the movie and say that it isn't racist, but you're completely ignoring the real reasons why it is even an issue. You're looking for bug-eyed Stepin Fetchits and other stereotypes, but that's not what people are objecting to in Song of the South. To understand why people like Alice Walker have a problem with the movie, you need drop the knee-jerk anti-PC agenda and look beyond the film's surface. Your repeated statements about the film's lack of racist depictions makes it clear that you simply aren't taking into account anything beyond that surface.

I have to agree with you, Spinner.

Thats whaat i said before as well Spinner but Dalvin dosen't read the posts he just repeats the same thing.

I think he truly dosen't understand why its not released and only rants PC.

I wish people would read both our previous posts because we have both made excellent points.

I'm not sure what Alice Walker has to complain about. Disney's Aladdin isn't much like the Arabic folk tales, and Sleeping Beauty isn't much like the German tales. Disney has never s