Song of the South anytime ever? (merged) - Page 3

The Exister · 09-18-03, 08:46 AM

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.

ToddJamesPierce · 09-18-03, 11:46 AM

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.

Dalvin · 09-18-03, 01:25 PM

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.

Class316 · 09-18-03, 01:56 PM

Quote:

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

FatTony · 09-18-03, 08:35 PM

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.

Jason · 09-18-03, 10:03 PM

Quote:

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.

ZackR · 09-18-03, 10:20 PM

Quote:

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

Feathers McGraw · 09-18-03, 11:51 PM

Quote:

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.

Which Button? · 09-18-03, 11:52 PM

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

Onizuka · 09-19-03, 12:19 AM

Quote:

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.

ZackR · 09-19-03, 12:26 AM

Quote:

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?

Which Button? · 09-19-03, 01:21 AM

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."

ZackR · 09-19-03, 01:25 AM

Quote:

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.

Which Button? · 09-19-03, 02:39 AM

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.

Dalvin · 09-19-03, 12:26 PM

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

MrE · 09-19-03, 02:16 PM

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

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

Dalvin · 09-19-03, 03:36 PM

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

Jason · 09-19-03, 04:10 PM

Quote:

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.

FatTony · 09-19-03, 04:32 PM

Quote:

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.

Quote:

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.

Class316 · 09-19-03, 04:43 PM

Quote:

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

Then do yourself a favor and watch documentaries.

Onizuka · 09-19-03, 09:22 PM

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.

FatTony · 09-20-03, 01:27 AM

Quote:

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!

fender69 · 09-20-03, 02:27 AM

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.

Which Button? · 09-21-03, 02:16 PM

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.

Dalvin · 09-21-03, 05:44 PM

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.

09-18-03, 08:46 AM	#51
The Exister DVD Talk Special Edition Join Date: May 2003 Location: Baltimore, MD Posts: 1,150	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. __________________ Hmmmmm... My DVD collection

09-18-03, 11:46 AM	#52
ToddJamesPierce Member Join Date: Feb 2000 Posts: 170	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. __________________ ---you can email me directly at <tjp4773@mailer.fsu.edu>

09-18-03, 01:25 PM	#53
Dalvin Banned Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 1,840	Utterly Ridiculous, 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.

09-18-03, 08:35 PM	#55
FatTony DVD Talk Special Edition Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Seattle Posts: 1,773	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. __________________ PSN: tdogg241

09-19-03, 12:26 PM	#65
Dalvin Banned Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 1,840	ahh....Eisner.....my old friend 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

09-18-03, 11:52 PM	#59
Which Button? Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 390	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

09-19-03, 01:21 AM	#62
Which Button? Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 390	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."

09-19-03, 02:39 AM	#64
Which Button? Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 390	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.

09-19-03, 02:16 PM	#66
MrE DVD Talk Special Edition Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 1,876	Keep repeating, "It's only a movie...." http://www.snopes.com/disney/films/sots.htm

09-19-03, 03:36 PM	#67
Dalvin Banned Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 1,840	More than a movie 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

09-19-03, 09:22 PM	#71
Onizuka Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Miami, FL USA Posts: 122	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.

09-20-03, 02:27 AM	#73
fender69 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 363	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. __________________ I know I usually don't talk much about stuff unless it's solid, but this is interesting, and I think you should know.

09-21-03, 02:16 PM	#74
Which Button? Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 390	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.

09-21-03, 05:44 PM	#75
Dalvin Banned Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 1,840	Sign the Petetion to get it on DVD 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.