Gone With The Wind - my thoughts
#1
DVD Talk Special Edition
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: St. Albans, England (UK)
Posts: 1,376
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gone With The Wind - my thoughts
Gone With The Wind (1939): 4.5-5/5
Absolutely amazing film
First thing is its loooong (as long as one of the LOTR EE's) but that didnt matter, it didnt feel like it.
I didnt think I'd like it as I'm not used to seeing old classics, but its' a great story, as the title card says "Margaret Mitchell's Story of the Old South" (US Civil War). Its the story of a self-centered Southern girl named Scarlett O'Hara (Vivien Leigh).
I'm pretty sure I got the new remastered/restored version from cd-wow rentals (even though its a flipper?) - the picture quality is jaw dropping. Seriously, it looks like it was shot yesterday with rich and vibrant colours. Its that good. If I didnt, I was still more than pleased with it.
How Clark Gable didnt win the Best Actor Oscar for this film I'll never know. My sympathies also seemed to go one way then the other for Scarlett (Vivien Leigh, who sure looks lovely here), one minute a spoilt rich brat (IMO) who messes about with mens feelings, then a compassionate person. Perhaps playboy Rhett Butler (Clark Gable) is an anti-hero too.
The film is extremely emotional in places.
Originally, he didnt want to play the part, because Scarlett doesnt always love him. He once said "Thats the only picture I ever did in which the girl wasnt sure she wanted me the minute she saw me".
Absolutely amazing film
First thing is its loooong (as long as one of the LOTR EE's) but that didnt matter, it didnt feel like it.
I didnt think I'd like it as I'm not used to seeing old classics, but its' a great story, as the title card says "Margaret Mitchell's Story of the Old South" (US Civil War). Its the story of a self-centered Southern girl named Scarlett O'Hara (Vivien Leigh).
I'm pretty sure I got the new remastered/restored version from cd-wow rentals (even though its a flipper?) - the picture quality is jaw dropping. Seriously, it looks like it was shot yesterday with rich and vibrant colours. Its that good. If I didnt, I was still more than pleased with it.
How Clark Gable didnt win the Best Actor Oscar for this film I'll never know. My sympathies also seemed to go one way then the other for Scarlett (Vivien Leigh, who sure looks lovely here), one minute a spoilt rich brat (IMO) who messes about with mens feelings, then a compassionate person. Perhaps playboy Rhett Butler (Clark Gable) is an anti-hero too.
The film is extremely emotional in places.
Originally, he didnt want to play the part, because Scarlett doesnt always love him. He once said "Thats the only picture I ever did in which the girl wasnt sure she wanted me the minute she saw me".
#4
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
It's a terrific movie and the transfer to dvd is outstanding. The first time I ever saw this movie was in theaters about 10 years ago. Leigh won the Best Actress Oscar and Gable should have won Best Actor. But I say the most outstanding performance was by Hattie McDaniel who played the nanny and won Best Supporting Actress.
#5
DVD Talk Hero
Originally Posted by Rad14
What do you think of Margaret Mitchell's portrayal of the "Southern Gentlemen" and how they gallantly went to war to keep other human beings slaves?
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 363
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Doniphon
Absolutely terrific.
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TomOpus
...and this has to do with the DVD, how?
(BTW in that fantastic cinema year of 1939, it was Robert Donat who scooped the Best Actor Oscar for Goodbye Mr. Chips. Anyone who has seen his performance in that film will understand immediately why he won it).
The original poster called his thread, "Gone With The Wind - My thoughts". He then goes on to talk about what he thought of the film. In this vein then, I was simply asking what he thought about the way Margaret Mitchell portrayed her "Cavaliers" as "southern gentlemen" who gaily went off to war. After all, what were these "gentlemen" fighting for? To ensure the continuation of their prosperity gleaned from the hardship and barbarity they inflicted on Negroes.
I'm afraid I don't see the gallantry or southern hospitality in that.
As a colourful, well-acted and entertaining movie, GWTW is in a class of its own. However, the politics at its core are dubious to say the least. Compare these issues say with the portrayal of the same historical period in the TV miniseries ROOTS and I think you'll understand what I am getting at.
Surely I'm not the only person on these boards that feels this way?
#8
DVD Talk Special Edition
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: St. Albans, England (UK)
Posts: 1,376
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree about Scarlett being mean and self-centred, but if we feel something for her at the end thats a sign of a well written character - neither Butler nor Scarlett are whiter than white though Butler is more of a suave rogue, (IMO).
She and the others were on the side of the Cavaliers/Rebels right? Though Scarlett doesnt like the aspect of war with men dying (witness the scene in the hospital).
I dont know that much about the US Civil War. BTW I thought the acting of the people who played the servants was fine - one poster on another board said he didnt like the way the servants are treated in the film. Consider when the film was made and when its set - in the South in the 1800's (so isnt that close to how they would of been treated then?) - Scarlett's father calls the black people "darkies" (though that sounds awful now he doesnt mean to be insulting).
Of course we cant condone it, that doesnt mean we should sweep aspects of history under the carpet.
The woman who played Scarlett's mother was good too - amazingly she was only 3 years older than Vivien Leigh in 1939 (Leigh was 25, the other woman was 28).
Hattie McDaniel (The nanny) was the first black woman to win an Oscar.
Amazing to think it took another 63 years for Halle Berry to to win Best Actress, the first black woman to do so.
She and the others were on the side of the Cavaliers/Rebels right? Though Scarlett doesnt like the aspect of war with men dying (witness the scene in the hospital).
I dont know that much about the US Civil War. BTW I thought the acting of the people who played the servants was fine - one poster on another board said he didnt like the way the servants are treated in the film. Consider when the film was made and when its set - in the South in the 1800's (so isnt that close to how they would of been treated then?) - Scarlett's father calls the black people "darkies" (though that sounds awful now he doesnt mean to be insulting).
Of course we cant condone it, that doesnt mean we should sweep aspects of history under the carpet.
The woman who played Scarlett's mother was good too - amazingly she was only 3 years older than Vivien Leigh in 1939 (Leigh was 25, the other woman was 28).
Hattie McDaniel (The nanny) was the first black woman to win an Oscar.
Amazing to think it took another 63 years for Halle Berry to to win Best Actress, the first black woman to do so.
Last edited by grim_tales; 09-19-05 at 11:04 AM.
#9
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by grim_tales
I'm pretty sure I got the new remastered/restored version from cd-wow rentals (even though its a flipper?) - the picture quality is jaw dropping. Seriously, it looks like it was shot yesterday with rich and vibrant colours. Its that good. If I didnt, I was still more than pleased with it.
Edit: I just noticed you're in England. I don't know what the situation is there with the newer version.
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
grim_tales said
Consider when the film was made and when its set - in the South in the 1800's (so isnt that close to how they would of been treated then?)
Actually, with rape, castration, lynchings, whippings, murder, starvation and forced labour they were treated far worse! But of course, in 1939 unpleasant things like this could never be depicted in movies.
Of course we cant condone it, that doesnt mean we should sweep aspects of history under the carpet.
That's my very point. GWTW does sweep these aspects under the carpet, instead showing a white man's stereotype of what he thinks a happy negro in 1862 was like.
So we have Mammy portrayed as a kind of clown figure to make us laugh. Prissy - obviously a dimwit, if not completely retarded. Pork, the man servant - at a loss when having to make a decision on his own. Big Joe, the foreman - childlike in his speech patterns, who can't wait to dig ditches for the South (the very people who are keeping him a slave!) and so on.
Amazing to think it took another 63 years for Halle Berry to win Best Actress, the first black woman to do so.
I don't think that's amazing at all! Actually, rather a predictable sign of the sad times we live in.
Consider when the film was made and when its set - in the South in the 1800's (so isnt that close to how they would of been treated then?)
Actually, with rape, castration, lynchings, whippings, murder, starvation and forced labour they were treated far worse! But of course, in 1939 unpleasant things like this could never be depicted in movies.
Of course we cant condone it, that doesnt mean we should sweep aspects of history under the carpet.
That's my very point. GWTW does sweep these aspects under the carpet, instead showing a white man's stereotype of what he thinks a happy negro in 1862 was like.
So we have Mammy portrayed as a kind of clown figure to make us laugh. Prissy - obviously a dimwit, if not completely retarded. Pork, the man servant - at a loss when having to make a decision on his own. Big Joe, the foreman - childlike in his speech patterns, who can't wait to dig ditches for the South (the very people who are keeping him a slave!) and so on.
Amazing to think it took another 63 years for Halle Berry to win Best Actress, the first black woman to do so.
I don't think that's amazing at all! Actually, rather a predictable sign of the sad times we live in.
#13
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: I was here but I disappear
Posts: 8,407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's a brilliant film on every level - but discussing the dark undercurrents of the slavery issue do very much belong in any discussion of Gone With The Wind. They're inseparable.
If you're interested, I'm particularly proud of my review of the special edition for DVDTalk. I think I took the time to really discuss a lot of different aspects of this great film.
If you're interested, I'm particularly proud of my review of the special edition for DVDTalk. I think I took the time to really discuss a lot of different aspects of this great film.
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great Review Gil. I enjoyed your reflections immensely and as you said:
But the slave experience as portrayed in the film is a mix of Hollywood hooey and minstrel-show mugging with some fine performances and character details mixed in.
I couldn't agree more.
A great classic then. Tremendous entertainment. Wonderful, unforgettable characters and miraculous scenes. But IMHO, it does not do justice in its depiction of negroes and the REAL, and horrifying suffering they endured throughout those tumultuous years, at the hands of the so-called "gallant southern gentlemen" who proudly rode out on their noble cause.
(BTW, I am neither a negro nor an American. I just can't stand to see injustice in whatever medium it rears its ugly head).
But the slave experience as portrayed in the film is a mix of Hollywood hooey and minstrel-show mugging with some fine performances and character details mixed in.
I couldn't agree more.
A great classic then. Tremendous entertainment. Wonderful, unforgettable characters and miraculous scenes. But IMHO, it does not do justice in its depiction of negroes and the REAL, and horrifying suffering they endured throughout those tumultuous years, at the hands of the so-called "gallant southern gentlemen" who proudly rode out on their noble cause.
(BTW, I am neither a negro nor an American. I just can't stand to see injustice in whatever medium it rears its ugly head).
#15
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: I was here but I disappear
Posts: 8,407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the comments.
The thing that's interesting to me about the film's racial element is that in a way, it's almost MORE fitting that they sort of soft-pedal slavery than if the film were some sort of social exploration. Gone With The Wind is American, through and through. And the way it treats race is classic American weirdness. Sort of trying to ignore what's bad and put a positive spin on things. Giving the film the gloss that the characters themselves bought into, not to make a point, but because the whole fabric of the film somehow buys it too. For the intelligent viewer, this actually deepens the viewing experience of this particular film. I'm not saying that Amistad should take that tactic, but for GWTW it all goes into the turbulent, bizarre, grandoise mess of greatness and misery that makes the film so unique. It's crazy that a film where so much was done so perfectly on purpose could also have this seriously fucked up side that is ill-conceived and outdated. I've seen it quite a few times and I feel like I find more to think about each time.
The reason that I mentioned Birth of a Nation in the review is that that's the other "most important" film in the first half of the medium's existance and it too is about the Civil War, which tells you something about the importance of that war and slavery to America. But Birth of a Nation is SO viciously racist that it's almost difficult to pick out why it was cinematically important anymore. You want to think "Wow, the editing is so groundbreaking, the battles are so epic," but instead you spend a lot of the time just going "ewwww..." GWTW transcends that, but not 100%. It's very interesting that way.
The thing that's interesting to me about the film's racial element is that in a way, it's almost MORE fitting that they sort of soft-pedal slavery than if the film were some sort of social exploration. Gone With The Wind is American, through and through. And the way it treats race is classic American weirdness. Sort of trying to ignore what's bad and put a positive spin on things. Giving the film the gloss that the characters themselves bought into, not to make a point, but because the whole fabric of the film somehow buys it too. For the intelligent viewer, this actually deepens the viewing experience of this particular film. I'm not saying that Amistad should take that tactic, but for GWTW it all goes into the turbulent, bizarre, grandoise mess of greatness and misery that makes the film so unique. It's crazy that a film where so much was done so perfectly on purpose could also have this seriously fucked up side that is ill-conceived and outdated. I've seen it quite a few times and I feel like I find more to think about each time.
The reason that I mentioned Birth of a Nation in the review is that that's the other "most important" film in the first half of the medium's existance and it too is about the Civil War, which tells you something about the importance of that war and slavery to America. But Birth of a Nation is SO viciously racist that it's almost difficult to pick out why it was cinematically important anymore. You want to think "Wow, the editing is so groundbreaking, the battles are so epic," but instead you spend a lot of the time just going "ewwww..." GWTW transcends that, but not 100%. It's very interesting that way.
Last edited by Gil Jawetz; 09-19-05 at 06:39 PM.
#16
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The southern gentlemen weren't fighting for slavery any more than the northern men were fighting against it. Ulysses S. Grant said, "If I thought this war was to abolish slavery, I would resign my commission and offer my sword to the other side". Yet Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson both thought slavery to be evil. In James McPherson's 1997 "For Cause and Comrades", he analyzes primary sources to see why ordinary men, both northern and southern, fought. His conclusions are that 2/3rds of all the men, northern and souther fought for patriotrism. All of the men were probably racists. I have no more respect for the northern fighting man than the southern fighting man. I doubt either really cared about what his side was fighting for.
#17
Originally Posted by natevines
The southern gentlemen weren't fighting for slavery any more than the northern men were fighting against it. Ulysses S. Grant said, "If I thought this war was to abolish slavery, I would resign my commission and offer my sword to the other side". Yet Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson both thought slavery to be evil. In James McPherson's 1997 "For Cause and Comrades", he analyzes primary sources to see why ordinary men, both northern and southern, fought. His conclusions are that 2/3rds of all the men, northern and souther fought for patriotrism. All of the men were probably racists. I have no more respect for the northern fighting man than the southern fighting man. I doubt either really cared about what his side was fighting for.
#18
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The Pacific Northwest
Posts: 3,422
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by natevines
The southern gentlemen weren't fighting for slavery any more than the northern men were fighting against it. Ulysses S. Grant said, "If I thought this war was to abolish slavery, I would resign my commission and offer my sword to the other side". Yet Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson both thought slavery to be evil. In James McPherson's 1997 "For Cause and Comrades", he analyzes primary sources to see why ordinary men, both northern and southern, fought. His conclusions are that 2/3rds of all the men, northern and souther fought for patriotrism. All of the men were probably racists. I have no more respect for the northern fighting man than the southern fighting man. I doubt either really cared about what his side was fighting for.
Last edited by joliom; 09-19-05 at 10:08 PM.
#20
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The Pacific Northwest
Posts: 3,422
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The movie is not about their role as slave owners. They are not one-dimensional characters. They have many concerns and the movie is focusing on some of them moreso than others. I'm sure Scarlett is saddened to see her family's forced labor supply eliminated, but she's more concerned with the loss of her family's land, her unrequited love for Ashley, the burden of having to assume responsibility for her family's security and future (i.e. being forced to grow up faster than she'd like), and watching the world she's known all her life be violently destroyed and supplanted. By your logic we should complain more about The Godfather for not spending more time focusing on the perils of the average Americans victimized by organized crime. The story is not about that. It's focused on a particular aspect, not the entire broad picture. Is GWTW at times overly idealistic in its portrayal? Yes. Some of that is deliberately metaphorical and some just springs from the author and fillmmakers biases/sentimentality. Are there some anachronisms present? Certainly. But it's not purporting to be a full historical account of the Old South and its eventual death during the Civil War. You have to take it for what it is.
#22
DVD Talk Special Edition
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: St. Albans, England (UK)
Posts: 1,376
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The DVD I got wasnt the new SE, but the previous DVD-10 version released in England. That still looked very good.
Did anyone else find Scarlett really annoying? A bratty, spoilt character who seems to burst into tears every time she doesnt get her own way
I think we're supposed to feel that way though - Scarlett is 16 (I think) at the beginning of the film.
When talking about Halle Berry winning Best Actress for Monsters Ball, I didnt mean amazing (that it took so long) in a positive way, in fact the opposite.
I know GWTW features caricatures (sp?) of the servants in terms of how they act, what I meant was does it rose-tint how theyre treated in the house?
Consider Scarletts father tells her not to treat the servants badly.
Did anyone else find Scarlett really annoying? A bratty, spoilt character who seems to burst into tears every time she doesnt get her own way
I think we're supposed to feel that way though - Scarlett is 16 (I think) at the beginning of the film.
When talking about Halle Berry winning Best Actress for Monsters Ball, I didnt mean amazing (that it took so long) in a positive way, in fact the opposite.
I know GWTW features caricatures (sp?) of the servants in terms of how they act, what I meant was does it rose-tint how theyre treated in the house?
Consider Scarletts father tells her not to treat the servants badly.
Last edited by grim_tales; 09-20-05 at 04:01 AM.
#24
DVD Talk Special Edition
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: St. Albans, England (UK)
Posts: 1,376
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldnt not watch a film simply "because" its old.
Most of the 2nd part of the film is very emotional - with tragedy on tragedy that are just built up.
What do you think?
Most of the 2nd part of the film is very emotional - with tragedy on tragedy that are just built up.
Spoiler:
What do you think?