Roy Disney supports Song of the South release - Eisner does not (1 Viewer)

[MarkHastings]

Then don't let your kids watch it. I mean, put a warning sticker on it, make it only available to 18 and over to purchase, make it whatever, just release it!

 

[PaulP]

Granted I only saw parts of the film, and the except on the Alice in Wonderland SE DVD, but I didn't see anything blatantly racist. It's all hype. Release it already!

 

[Dan Rudolph]

It strikes me as hypocritical that Disney has suppressed Song of the South, but left the much more blatant racism of Peter Pan alone.

 

[Ernest Rister]

By the way, there are no slaves in Song of the South. The film is set in the post-War South. The African-Americans you see in the film are share-croppers, not slaves. Remus is a free man, hence his decision towards the end to pack up his belongings and leave when he is rebuked by Johnny's hateful ice-queen mother.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again. The furor over the exclusion of this title from the Disney library is a tempest in a tea pot. For one thing, the live-action sequences are excruciatingly mediocre and dull. They define every negative aspect of the word "melodrama". The animated sequences are a joy, but we're talking about 18-20 minutes, max. And if you really want to see Song of the South, just import the thing. I've had a Japanese LD of the title since the early 90's. Sure, it'll run you a few bones, but think of all the time you'll save complaining.

As for Ebert's comments, I had "Song of the South" book and records when I was growing up, and I also had a large book of Uncle Remus stories illustrated by Disney artists. From where I sit, the wit, warmth, and humour on display in those old folk tales are a better influence on kids than the junk culture of gangsta rap videos. It blows my mind our society worries about exposing our kids to "Brer Rabbit", yet seems to have no trouble at all with letting kids play "Grand Theft Auto III: Vice City".

To quote Goofy, a dog much wiser than I, in Lonesome Ghosts: "Sumthin' wrong here!"

 

[Yee-Ming]

Change in song? Sheesh, I must really be out of it, I had no idea. Isn't it still that Peabo Bryson "A Whole New World" thing? Could some kind soul please enlighten me?

Now that I think about it, there was a change in the lyrics, yes?

 

[Malcolm R]

It wasn't "A Whole New World," it was the opening song, "Arabian Nights":

 

[MatthewLouwrens]

I loved the Eisner jokes. I've missed having Billy as host (incidentally, I don't think I was thanked. I feel left out). I was terribly disappointed Destino didn't win, just cause I wanted to see what Roy Disney would say.

Following on from what I said, but going OT, but [rant]why on earth didn't they give the award to Destino? OK, I haven't seen any of the shorts, but you've got a short started by Walt Disney himself, working with Salvador Dali himself, and now its finally finished we have a chance to hear Roy possibly give an anti-Eisner speech to a global audience. Forget the quality of any of the films, surely that's worth voting for.[/rant]

 

[Erik.Ha]

I have to admit, its been 20 years+ since Ive seen Song of The South... But isnt it about bears and rabbits??? How can that be racist??? Honestly, all I can remember is humming Zippity Doo Dah... Did I miss something?

 

[Michael St. Clair]

I've watched the film multiple times.

Why is it considered racist?

Because the sharecroppers are happy, singing black sharecroppers?

Or is it the tar baby?

Talk about clutching at straws.

 

[Aryn Leroux]

The scenes of the shopkeepers are anything but satisfactual, as they are singing on there way to work in the fields, as if slaves enjoyed going to work for their owners! But the main reason for the controversy was the Uncle Remus character falling into the category of a sterotype of a happy darkie.

Quick Edit: Also the NAACP says that the movie sugar-coats the depiction of reconstruction-era south

 

[Damin J Toell]

Wow. That took some hard work to randomly fit a dollar sign into the guy's name. Di$ney, Luca$, $pielberg, and Micro$oft must all be very jealous.

DJ

 

[Chris]

Ok, here is my perspective. My children are of "blended" heritage, part of which is black. We've watched "Song of the South" and the kids did enjoy it.

And I have no problem with them enjoying the film. In fact, I would hope that we can talk about it as well. While the NAACP says "hey, it sugar coats reconstruction" and in a sense, it does, I think the NAACP would be advised that it's important to admit that for many blacks within the south, reconstruction, while a troubling time, was very uplifting. For the first time in years, people had seen, and tasted freedom. And, for all the faults and persecution that still went on, it was not slavery.

There were books and writings transcribed from former slaves (of which I have several) in which some of the greatest poems, legends, and stories are passed down. Stories that went from themselves to their families to others to keep them hopeful to show them believing in the promise of tomorrow.. and those writings occurred while they were slaves. There are also terrible stories about horrors that occurred as well.

I always found "SOTS" to be a very affirmative message for my children. It's a sign of how far we've come, that some terms in the film acceptable at the time, are not now, that we have continued to grow as a society. It's also a film that I think shows that even in the greatest of adversity, people can have hope and joy within themselves.

Just as with other films, it is part of the past, and an important part of history.

I think you're much better having a dialog with your children and talking about where we are, where we all came from, and what help them with history rather then deny it and pretend it didn't happen. SOTS still receives airplay with "Zip-A-Dee-Doo-Dah" being remade and airing on Radio Disney ad nauseum. There is always hope for something better, and even the downtrodden believe, and have a reason to expect that it can be theirs

 

[Glenn Overholt]

So, the NAACP considers SOTS a documentary?

Really, get a grip.

I did hear today that Michael's last day will be Wednesday...he is being voted out! Cheers!

Glenn

 

[Damin J Toell]

He can't be voted out. No one is running against him.

DJ

 

[Eric Paddon]

I just watched the film tonight for the first time on a DVD-R of the Japanese LD. What I saw was completely innocuous compared to the Warner Brothers and MGM cartoons that are no longer shown on TV with their silly caricaturing of black maids or people doing Al Jolson imitations when an explosion blackens their faces. *Those* are the kind of cartoons that need introductary comments from Maltin etc. (and they should be released on DVD, don't get me wrong, but I have no problem with them not being on Saturday morning TV anymore), not "Song Of The South".

 

[DanFe]

Actually, Yee-Ming, very well aware of that.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Of course the movie sugar-coats the depiction of reconstruction-era South! It's a Disney movie, not a dramatic insight into a contentious era in American history.

 

[Scott L]

Interesting article:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4409729/

Only 22%? Hopefully next election someone will be running against him, don't know why not now with all the turmoil.

 

[Jon Martin]

Great to hear that Roy is in favor of the release. I already voted against Eisner with my shares so hopefully others do the same.

I have SONG on laser and it is not racist. GONE WITH THE WIND is far more insensitive and that is out there, shown all the time on TV.

The thing is that kids today probably wouldn't even be interested in the film. It is rather slow compared to current animated titles. They'd probably be bored by it.

If they released it, as a Treasures title, in the tin at a $39 price point (so you wouldn't see it for sale at every grocery store) with extras, introductions, and addressing the controversy, gear it to an adult audience, I am sure it would go over fine.

 

[Mark Zimmer]

I'm pretty sure the nervousness hinges on the phrase "Tar Baby" which in context isn't used as a racial epithet at all, but refers to an actual person made out of tar. Stick it in the Disney Treasures tin, limit the release and give it the proper historical context and there shouldn't be any problem at all. Or license it to Criterion.

And really, it does have a positive attitude toward the blacks, who are all portrayed as essentially decent (unlike the whites), and in the person of Remus demonstrates you don't have to take crap from the narrow-minded white folks. I suppose if it were made today he'd blow her head off, and that'd be considered OK, but I don't see the picture as it is to be racist or negative in the least. As Ernest points out, these are not slaves, and they do have a newfound freedom to take off if they don't like their situation, which while it may not seem like much, was hugely important as a shift in attitude and law from the slavery regime. Are we supposed to pretend that Reconstruction never happened?