Possible Release of Disney's "Song of the South"? (1 Viewer)

[Steve Tannehill]

Ernest, you can stomp and yell all you want to, but the perception is going to be that of happy singing slaves and little black tar babies. I've seen this movie a number of times, by the way, and I don't appreciate the tone.

Racial slurs are the real problem, and little 5-year-old parrots going around the schoolyard calling their classmates by a name that was erased just like Sambo's from the American lexicon (when those restaurants were renamed to Denny's.)

Leonard Maltin telling kids "it's not nice to call people tar babies in this day and age" will not cut it. Maybe there could be an alternate subtitle track that pops up and says "remember kids, it's not nice to say tar baby, even though Uncle Remus is telling a story about one."

And that's why we don't have Song of the South on home video in the United States.


Brilliant ideas.

- Steve

 

[Matt Butler]

Word!

 

[Malcolm R]

They've released "The Jeffersons" (with George squawking "Honkey!" at every opportunity) and "All in the Family" (with Archie's slurs too numerous to mention) without controversy.

If parents would explain to their "5-year-old parrots" after watching that this is unacceptable and rude language in current society, rather than just turning them loose on the world once the credits roll, there would also be few problems.

I think we'll see this released once Eisner is out the door. As others have said, this wasn't a film to be ashamed of until he walked in the door.

 

[JohnPM]

I think the "vault section" included in the latest Mickey Mouse B/W Volume Two was actually a sort of dry-run, and perhaps a barometer to test the public's reaction to possibly controversial material. If those racial/ethnic cartoons get by in the marketplace without a major flap, chances are "Song Of The South" could as well. The wartime Disney shorts were the initial toe-in-the-water for the company, and that seems to have come off without incident.
Their fear of "Song Of The South" is understandable. Would you want to be the so-called executive that green-lights such a release? If your employer turns up on the op-ed page of USA Today for promoting racist movies, you'd be the first one escorted out to the parking lot. Names on corporate office doors are printed with water-colors, and political correctness is a social ideal enforced with people's jobs. I don't blame any Disney employeee's being afraid to pull the trigger on "Song Of The South".

 

[george kaplan]

I would be beyond shocked if a 5 year old were to watch this film and then start calling people Tar Baby. It's been a while, but to the best of my recollection, the Tar Baby is only a cartoon character in this film, not used as an insult, and expecting kids to parrot "you're a tar baby", would be as likely as them yelling out "you're Br'er Bear".

Frankly, I think there would be very little actual outcry if they released this, and far less than they already get from both pro and anti-gay groups over happenings at their theme park.

I'm pretty sure that $ is the bottom line, and if they would sell the video outside of Splash Mountain, which is the most popular attraction at Disney World, they'd make far more money that they'd ever lose due to some imagined boycott, which would never come to fruition.

 

[Henry Gale]

I also own the Japanese LD of “Who Censored Br’er Rabbit” and have my own thoughts as to why “Only One Good Song in the South"* is not available on DVD.
1986 was the last theatrical release of Song of the South? What happened in 1988? Who Framed Roger Rabbit?! Was the studio hoping to drag the franchise out a bit? Maybe. There were sequels, sort of, in a way.
Why confuse the public with the similarities between Brothers Br’er and Rodger? Both films had racial themes and a mix of live action and animation. Keep it simple, keep Br’er on the shelf. Besides, that 1946 film was coma inducing boring for much of its 94 minutes.
Another problem is, Little Johnny’s parents don’t fit the Disney mold. They were supposed to die in the first five minutes of the film; instead, they’re alive and rather unpleasant.
Yes, Uncle Remus speaks in dialect. He’s no Sidney Poitier, but he is wise and a good role model. You would have to listen to him with your heart to know this.
We have Lincoln “Stepin Fetchit” Perry, Matthew “Stymie” Beard and Billie 'Buckwheat' Thomas readily available on DVD. No one seems to think the Republic is at risk due to that. The only Bondage page at ebay is not a list of minorities for sale.
Some people are convinced that “Song of the South” is racist. Others insist it is not. There are also differing camps on the subject of Amos ‘n’ Andy and Charlie Chan as portrayed by Warner Oland and Sidney Toler.

Go ahead, release the DVD and let everyone find out what they weren't missing. And make my laser disc worth $5.00. :frowning:

*O.K.…name TWO songs from this musical!

 

[Ken Martinez]

1)Sooner or Later
2)Uncle Remus Said

 

[walter o]

I have the japanese LD, is that uncut?

Also Sambo's was not re-named Denny's, both existed at the same item, Sambo's all just went out of business, however there is one Sambo's left, in santa barbara. On Sambo's restaurant was named that because the owners names where Sam and Bo. They did take down the black kid runnign away form tiger logo, and lightened his skin to make him "indian" but they all just went out of business.

also, remember when SNL did a spoof of SOTS where Mr mike killed the rabbit and all?

 

[Henry Gale]

Thought maybe you were asking Steve....but..YES!...it's uncut. I was very careful when I opened it.

 

[Dick]

You know, I have a pretty good childhood memory, and I remember seeing cartoons on t.v. about Little Black Sambo (we even had an 8mm Castle Film of one of them), and I never made any association betwen them and any black children in the area (I grew up in Southern New York in the 50's). It just never occurred to me that the tar baby in SONG OF THE SOUTH was meant to represent a human person. I grew up in a fairly conservative home but just never developed a prejudicial attitude regarding race, especially from cartoons (in fact, I turned into a full-blown liberal!). I think that this issue is SEVERLY overblown, and Eisner is clearly a large part of the reason for that. If I have a prejudice now, it is toward narrow-minded, revisionist hypocrites who love deciding what people can or cannot see, hear and do (and think, whenever possible). There will be some African Americans who will be offended if SOS is released, but most will shrug it off - or better yet, enjoy it as a bookmark of the past. I don't agree with Roger Ebert that this film would create a lot of angst among black school children or heckling from white school children or feelings of renewed inferiority. Those who will be most riled by its video release are the Donald Wildmons of the world - the ones who don't know how to take things in their proper context and who explode with rage when they cannot have the final say in what is available for you and I to rent or buy for the privacy of our own homes.

Let's see if Eisner's departure finally leads to the release of this innocent victim from its celluloid cell. I say, give it a new trial using DNA evidence - what the prosecution will find, if open-minded, is a decent family film with great animated sequences, a memorable song or two, a few solid moral lessons which hold up even today, some outdated but obviously innocent caricatures, and not a trace of malice toward anyone. Of that last ingedient, how many people (or movies) can claim to have it?

 

[Ruz-El]

I find it really hard to beleive that if this is released, a parent would buy it not having any idea about what it is about, show it to there kids and be totally offended because they had no idea that it had racial stereotypes. This movie is a known comodity. To my eyes, the racial portrayals in this film are far more respectable than many other films of this time, I would go so far as to say that "Gone With The Wind" was far mor embarassing than this, where people of color are displayed positivly and actually morally superior than whites. Singing slaves are offensive and shouldn't be shown? I thought that singing slaves and the work song tradition that they started were the bases of blues, jazz and basically all current American music and culture. Does that make slavery right, of course not, and to argue as such shows ignorance, but the fact is, music did come out of unhappy slaves, music that I love.

Kids seeing the film and calling others "Tar Baby"? I find this hard to believe in a culture that uses the word "nigger" in it's chart topping pop songs. Makes the power of Tar Baby pretty redundant. And like stated above, no one was called tar baby in the movie, the tar baby was an object used as a trap. I just can't see kids of any color flip there lids at the term and start belittling one another. Are the nations parents so piss poor in this day and age that they raise there children to be ignorant, racist morons? Should irresposible parents be enough to prevent me from enjoying the film? I'm sick of not being able to see the things I want to see uncut because little Johnny shouldn't see it. Maybe parents should do there jobs and EDUCATE the little tykes, instead of crying about the sky falling.

There is no good exscuse out there to not release this film. Well groups complain? Of course they well, that's why there are censoring groups, they exist to complain. Censorship of ANY kind always bring out the worst in people.

Disney should release this for all the reasons stated above. It is classic film making, a example of an evolution in the art of film making, a major piece in modern pop culture, a huge part of the Disney studios. Plus I love the film and would like to see it as the film makers intended it, instead of the crappy boot version I currently have, and was forced to find because it is currently unavailable. And I didn't pay for it. Because Disney has not released SOTS on reg 1 DVD, no one made any money. I would gladly give my money to Disney to get my hands on SOTS.

Pull a Live Aid, give the revenue to the United Negro College Fund, or another suitable charitay for people of color, or better yet, children period. Make the censors look like assholes for complaining. And present "Song Of The South" for what it is, a classic piece of American fim. And don't apologize for it.

 

[Chris*W]

I don't think this film would send that many shock waves if released on DVD. Unfortunately, I haven't seen the film, but from what I've gathered from various articles, the controversial content isn't that bad. Personally, I don't understand how a film like "Bringing' Down the House", with it's racial overtones and stereotypes can be accepted in mainstream society, but "Song of the South" can't. Any kid that would go to school and call one of their African-American friends a "tarbaby" just because they saw it in a movie needs some serious mental help or new parents.

 

[Ira Siegel]

You said it, Bre'r Russell. I can't wait for the people under 35 to understand my briar patch references.

 

[Ernest Rister]

Ernest: are you stating that you want people to watch the movie and then comment whether they agree with you or not or that they should shut up and not provide an alternative viewpoint on Song Of The South?

Neither.

I think the film should be seen before people make judgements on it or summarize the content. Once they've seen it, they can go ahead and comment on it. Agreeing with me or or not is moot.

The fact remains that there are no slaves in Song of the South, and any time I read someone claim otherwise, be they just an average joe on the internet or some college professor from Florida quoted in a newspaper article...that just proves to me that the person either didn't actually see the movie or didn't understand what it was he or she saw.

On a side note, personally, I think the film is pretty bad. The live action sequences are less entertaining then watching ice melt. The animated sequences are fantastic, but they only make up 1/3 of the film's running time. The furor over the release of this film is a tempest in a teapot, because the movie itself isn't worth all the sturm und drang, and once people actually see the movie and realize that all the bad guys are white, that Remus is the smartest, wisest, and most human and loving person in the movie, then all this noise is going to fade away. SotS is guilty of bad taste, it is not quilty of Racism.

 

[Ernest Rister]

Ernest, you can stomp and yell all you want to, but the perception is going to be that of happy singing slaves and little black tar babies.

Incorrect perceptions are bred of ignorance, and ignorance is not the foundation of a valued opinion. People are free to have any opinion they wish of SotS, but if it is based on the assertion that the film features "happy singing slaves", then the opinion is not worth listening to, because there are no slaves in SOTS, and one of the songs sung in the film is a mournful POV from the black sharecroppers about the misery of their lives ("Let the Rain Pour Down").

 

[oscar_merkx]

I had never heard of SOTS and it is only through this forum that I have followed the debate.

I would like to see an uncut version with commentary if possible

 

[MatthewLouwrens]

This is the thing I don't understand. I've never seen the film, but remember reading the Brer Rabbit book(s?) as a child, and the tar baby was literally a figure made out of tar. It never even occured to me that this could be used as a racial insult until I read about the SOTS situation - because that is not how it is used in the story.

Besides, I need it to be released, because Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah is one of the AFI 100 Songs, and I therefore need to see the film as part of my effort to see all the AFI List films.

 

[george kaplan]

I actually agree with this. As a film, Song of the South is some great animation surrounded by pretty unwatchable live action. This puts me in a minor quandry, because frankly I'd love it if they put out only the animation, but I'm also strongly in the "uncut only" camp as a general principle. The truth is, I'd probably copy only the animated parts to a separate dvd and just watch that.

 

[Eddie Estes]

There are a number of reasons I see why this movie is unavailable. Most have to do with feelings and no rational thought processes.
Mr. Eisner's political persuasion, his fear of controversy.
One is a real problem, the other is a fear that I believe is overblown.
There is an obvious double standard as far as racial slurs
go as in the Jeffersons.
Trust me in this country you have professional offended people. That is their purpose in life. They take what anybody with any common sense would call a minor irritation and make it into a major issue.
That is the reason I have gone to less than legal means to watch Song of the South with my family.

 

[Brian Kidd]

I wouldn't say that the live action is unwatchable. It certainly is far from the best of Disney's output, but it's enjoyable enough. Bobby Driscoll needs to be shot, though. Why Walt seemed to have a soft spot for that kid, I'll never know. He was fine in PETER PAN, but that's only because he was a little older and you didn't have to actually watch him overact.

The animated segments are some of the funniest that the studio ever produced.