Adults Opinion on "Song of the South"

[DisHubby]

First of all, this movie takes place AFTER slavery was abolished in the USA. And aside from that, there is no slander to ANYONE of any race in the movie. The way that black Americans address the white kids (if you must bring this up) was in line with how it was at that time. But there was not at ANY time reference to slavery or anything of the sort. As a matter of fact the white kids addressed Uncle Remus with a degree of respect. Not as a father, but as an adult at least. He was a story teller, nothing more. He wasn't a slave, just a storyteller. I'm just surprised at the over abundance of elbowroom that is given should ANYTHING be deemed at any level “possibly” racist, or demeaning to anyone. Point of fact... that is how it was then. It's not degrading, it is just how it was. But I stress again, “Uncle Remus” was respected by the kids, and they looked forward to his stories! That is ALL. He doesn't address them as if they 'own' him at all. SO.. Why isn't this classic re-released? It should be, as it IS a classic Disney film!!!


Opinions welcome.... Just my opinion...


DisHubby..

 

[AnnetteF]

I have never understood this myself. This beautiful movie has been buried and I'm really not sure why. You're right, Uncle Remus is supposed to be a sharecropper and at no time is anyone in the movie disrespectful toward him that I could see. And yet a movie like Gone with the Wind is readily available. And I agree with you, too, that some of these things are, unfortunately, a part of history and it cannot be changed. But I love Song of the South and would love to see it released for a whole new generation to enjoy. I will be interested to hear what others have to say.

 

[DBarber600]

IMO, this film is less offensive than some of the current Disney films; two examples:

1. A Goofy Movie - my all-time favorite, but ... jock straps getting sling-shotted on the last day of school. Funny to me, but hard to explain to a 5 year old.

2. Cars - is it necessary for Lightning to address Radiator Springs as "Hillbilly Hell"?

Uncle Remus is portrayed as the hero of this story - the children seek him out for guidance.

 

[hickchick]

I haven't seen this movie in 25 years, but I do remember loving it as a young child. I would love to have the chance to watch it with my own daughter and form my own adult opinion of it!

Zip-A-Dee-Do-Dah is included on one of the sing-along videos that Disney has done, so I wish they would release the whole movie!

 

[MiniGirl]

I also love SotS, but that is just remembering it from my childhood. Like the PP, I would like to see it again. Things do seem different from when we were kids. I remember loving "Grease" and wanting to watch it with my own daughters. I was thankful when they really had no interest in it because I didn't remember some of the more risque parts.

I should add that my dd(7)'s favorite ride in all of WDW is Splash Mountain, and I've told her that song is from an old Disney movie and she is wanting to see it. I know the movie is readily available on eBay. Oh well..... We'll see.

 

[Grendalynn]

I agree with the previous posters. It is a portrayal of american history and events and behavious that happened in the PAST. I don't believe that it is a view of Mr. Disney, more or less a story and only a story. It reflects American history and is a great movie! I know of someone that owns a bootleg version of the movie and I saw it a few years back. Its just as good then as it was when I was a kid. Unless I am missing something, I think its a great movie and a good lerning/teaching tool for children.

My boys (and myself of course) love Splash Mountain too! I can hear the song in my head as I type. Zip a dee doo da is also has fond childhood memory attached... I can remember singing a long to a Disney 8Track on my was to WDW with my sisters and parents in the family motorhome!! Ok - enough rambling from me....

 

[NotUrsula]

Here is a scholarly essay on the topic from the University of Virginia website:

http://xroads.virginia.edu/~MA99/diller/mammy/song/preface.html

Essentially, the primary objection to it is that it promotes a "happy darkies" myth. The postwar South was a very hard place for freed blacks, and the idealized plantation represented in the film was considered to be an insulting distortion of what postwar life in rural Georgia was actually like.

Personally, I'd like to see the film repackaged as a portion of a documentary, intercut with lots of explanation about stereotypes, racism, and the reality of Georgia in that era.

 

[DisHubby]

your totally correct!!! look at the movie Gigi!!! it's rated "G" for god's sake!!! But the entire premise of the movie is how a girl is raised as a proper courtesan. As her great aunt before her was. And she even talks about bed hopping when her “man” gets tired of her. How is that ok, but SOTS not???? I'm really confused....

I have never understood this myself. This beautiful movie has been buried and I'm really not sure why. You're right, Uncle Remus is supposed to be a sharecropper and at no time is anyone in the movie disrespectful toward him that I could see. And yet a movie like Gone with the Wind is readily available. And I agree with you, too, that some of these things are, unfortunately, a part of history and it cannot be changed. But I love Song of the South and would love to see it released for a whole new generation to enjoy. I will be interested to hear what others have to say.

 

[DisHubby]

IMO, this film is less offensive than some of the current Disney films; two examples:

1. A Goofy Movie - my all-time favorite, but ... jock straps getting sling-shotted on the last day of school. Funny to me, but hard to explain to a 5 year old.

2. Cars - is it necessary for Lightning to address Radiator Springs as "Hillbilly Hell"?

Uncle Remus is portrayed as the hero of this story - the children seek him out for guidance.

you are correct.. I grew up with this movie. it's a classic!!! and my son(who is only 1) but I hope to share this with him, as a true Disney movie, not, as a movie that he can see only because I happen to have an old copy of it.

 

[DisHubby]

I haven't seen this movie in 25 years, but I do remember loving it as a young child. I would love to have the chance to watch it with my own daughter and form my own adult opinion of it!

Zip-A-Dee-Do-Dah is included on one of the sing-along videos that Disney has done, so I wish they would release the whole movie!

YES YES YES!!! there is an entire ride at disney with his movie in mind... I'm not going to say which one because you all should know, only because it's been around almost as long as I've been alive. But they have Rabbit, fox, etc etc.. right there.. and I know when my sone gets old enough he will ask wht movie ot show it's from... and I do (in this case) have an answer.... the same thing as I think they are getting rid of country bear jamboree... "blood on the saddle... blood on the ground.... " kinda morbid I know... BUT... still a classic...

 

[NotUrsula]

look at the movie Gigi!!! it's rated "G" for god's sake!!! But the entire premise of the movie is how a girl is raised as a proper courtesan. As her great aunt before her was. And she even talks about bed hopping when her “man” gets tired of her. How is that ok, but SOTS not???? I'm really confused....

The simple answer is that neither Gigi nor GWTW is a film specifically made for the children's market. Children's films are held to a higher standard.

The films mentioned are rated as they are because the MPAA ratings system in place at the time of their release did not reserve the rating "G" as suitable for children; that is a fairly recent interpretation of the "G". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPAA_film_rating_system

 

[Mouse House Mama]

I would love for my kids to see it. I even have the book from when I was a kid. It was one of my favorites. If you look at any Disney movie, especially the older ones it portrays the current times at movie release.As an example, look at Dumbo, all the railroad workers were black men. Am I offended? No, I just think it is a reflection of that time period. I think Unlce Remus was such a great storyteller. I hope to share this with my kids.

 

[DisHubby]

The simple answer is that neither Gigi nor GWTW is a film specifically made for the children's market. Children's films are held to a higher standard.

The films mentioned are rated as they are because the MPAA ratings system in place at the time of their release did not reserve the rating "G" as suitable for children; that is a fairly recent interpretation of the "G". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPAA_film_rating_system

Should it matter? if it's GWTW or SOTS, or Gigi... MPAA ratings are what they are. Can I help it if back in the 60's and 70's thy were a bit more realistic... or were they open to some infractions thant now are "taboo" ??? fact is that they don't know thier A** (Bum) from a hole in the ground and that they give some movies ratings acording to what is popular and what they are getting paid... YES paid... to say. Look at the animated movie Tarzan (1999). The villan not only dies, but you see the vine snap tanunt and know that he was hung. OR how about Watership Down? A fantastic movie from 1978. This animated movie is rated PG, but it contains many scenes of rabbits getting killed by other rabbits, and there is a good amount of blood. Is this the same? or what is ok? I would think that Watership down is much worse then tarzan. Or better yet, how about the 1954 classic Animal Farm. Loads of death in that one, yet it's unrated. how is that possible?

Let's see.... Animal Farm (1954)by George Orwell is unrated, so is the movie ******* 2. (there is an unrated version).... does this mean that they are the same for our kids? NO!!!

The long and short fact is that you have to over see what your kids are watching! And content should be looked at, not just a rating. And now I go back to SOTS. This is much less offensive than alot of these movies we see and let our kids watch based on MPAA ratings. So I say it should be up to parents to decide!!!

Again... Just my thought.

 

[vhoffman]

jumping in here....Gone with the Wind, is, in my opinion, a classic movie but not an accurate portryal of slave life in the South. Nor was it meant to be, the whole slave issue was just part of the back drop for the movie.

But what gripped me was the preamble (write over, nowdays use a voice over since many can't read!) that siad "......the pretty world of master and slave." I'm glad to see that's been edited in many re-releases. That would be like saying "...........the happy times had at Auschwitz". History or fiction, we need to be more careful in recalling the past, at least don't make it seem like "fun"

 

[DisHubby]

jumping in here....Gone with the Wind, is, in my opinion, a classic movie but not an accurate portryal of slave life in the South. Nor was it meant to be, the whole slave issue was just part of the back drop for the movie.

But what gripped me was the preamble (write over, nowdays use a voice over since many can't read!) that siad "......the pretty world of master and slave." I'm glad to see that's been edited in many re-releases. That would be like saying "...........the happy times had at Ausweitz". History or fiction, we need to be more careful in recalling the past, at least don't make it seem like "fun"

sort of.... Slavery (while a horrible part of our history) was brutal to say the very least, it was for the purpose of servitude, whereas Auschwitz was for the sole purpose of human destruction or genocide. I do however understand what you mean.

 

[NotUrsula]

This is much less offensive than alot of these movies we see and let our kids watch based on MPAA ratings.

Perhaps you let your children watch movies based on their MPAA ratings -- I don't pay any attention to them at all precisely BECAUSE I know how they are assigned. I don't let my kids watch any movie that I have not prescreened, so I make my own decisions in that regard.

You are the one who asked why SOTS has been voluntarily suppressed when Gigi (a "G" rated movie) has not been: my point was that comparing based on ratings doesn't matter in this context, due to the long span between release dates and the fact that the accuracy of the depiction of social conditions isn't something that MPAA rates for. Besides, when Gigi was released SOTS was still in Disney's catalog. The first public objections to SOTS were published in 1947, but SOTS wasn't pulled from distribution until 1986. Disney just didn't care much about offending blacks in 1947.

Let's all remember that SOTS is not "banned" by distributors or theatre owners. It has been pulled by the copyright owner, Walt Disney Pictures, for reasons related to public relations interests. They made it, they own it, they can do with it what they want. As it happens, the rights to both Gigi and GWTW are owned by MGM, who have licensed their catalog to Fox Pictures. If Fox had the rights to SOTS, it probably would be in release, as they don't seem to be concerned about offending ANYONE.

 

[lost*in*cyberspace]

I saw this movie as a child and thought it was stupid.

You can easily find copies for purchase doing a Google search.

 

[CleveRocks]

YES YES YES!!! there is an entire ride at disney with his movie in mind... I'm not going to say which one because you all should know, only because it's been around almost as long as I've been alive.

Really? You're quite well-spoken for someone born in 1992, the year Splash opened at WDW!

 

[AnnetteF]

Perhaps you let your children watch movies based on their MPAA ratings -- I don't pay any attention to them at all precisely BECAUSE I know how they are assigned. I don't let my kids watch any movie that I have not prescreened, so I make my own decisions in that regard.

You are the one who asked why SOTS has been voluntarily suppressed when Gigi (a "G" rated movie) has not been: my point was that comparing based on ratings doesn't matter in this context, due to the long span between release dates and the fact that the accuracy of the depiction of social conditions isn't something that MPAA rates for. Besides, when Gigi was released SOTS was still in Disney's catalog. The first public objections to SOTS were published in 1947, but SOTS wasn't pulled from distribution until 1986. Disney just didn't care much about offending blacks in 1947.

Let's all remember that SOTS is not "banned" by distributors or theatre owners. It has been pulled by the copyright owner, Walt Disney Pictures, for reasons related to public relations interests. They made it, they own it, they can do with it what they want. As it happens, the rights to both Gigi and GWTW are owned by MGM, who have licensed their catalog to Fox Pictures. If Fox had the rights to SOTS, it probably would be in release, as they don't seem to be concerned about offending ANYONE.

I really don't want to offend anyone but I would like to hear an honest explanation of what is so offensive about this movie? I understand about life in post war Georgia being very hard, however, none of this is what the movie is about. Uncle Remus is a great storyteller and tells his stories to the children. No one ever said that his life was perfect and no other aspect of his life is depicted in the movie. Again, it's just the backdrop for the movie. Even people who suffer through great hardships throughout their lives can have happy moments sometimes, can't they? Even in something like the old TV miniseries Roots, the characters were shown happy at "moments" in their lives such as weddings and their children being born.

And in Gone with the Wind, the slaves Mammy and Prissy are shown to be with Scarlett after the war and seemingly quite content and happy about the new house they will be living in. It seems to me that that is much worse than SOTS.

The only thing that I can figure out here is that it seems that people think it is wrong to show the good moments without also showing the bad. Is that it?

 

[Deesknee]

I feel I should say, because IMHO it matters. I am not an African American. I have never lived in the south. I can not pretend that I can speak for anyone other than myself.

When my older kids were young (they are teens now), they would ask me to read this to them every night. Usually I did.


I enjoyed the movie, as well as the book.

I've grown up in a small town in the north. I have no idea what it was or is like to live in the south. I've learned about history in school and at the library. I am entertained by movies. I agree with the former poster who mentioned adding documentary regarding true life in the south during that time. I think if we deliberatly portray history in an incorrect manner we do a great injustice to our future. That said, the entertainment industry glorifies nearly all reality they make into movies.