Came across a full length version on the internet if anyone wants to watch.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Song of the South
- Thread starter manmythlegend
- Start date
- Status
Tony Perkis
Well-Known Member
Eh, whatever. Put it in a vault because it historically should be preserved, but it’s just not worth a damn to linger on it much.
Sharon&Susan
Well-Known Member
How would he be able to start feeling ashamed, considering that he died over 50 years ago?
Tony Perkis
Well-Known Member
Yeah, it kinda does. Not to defend Song of the South, but context does matter.
Expecting a 2020 mentality in the 1940s is unreasonable. Certain things are products of their time. A 1946 film that is far outdated and offensive shouldn’t be celebrated, but it should be acknowledged for what it is and understand the scenarios pertaining to its initial release, for historical purposes.
I just finished SotS. Is it that bad honestly? Yeah the plantation relationships are pure fantasy but it's a freakin' Disney movie. Was Walt suppose to show the owners whipping poor Remus when he spoke out of turn?
Robert Downer wore blackface in Tropic Thunder which was very recent compared to SotS and I don't see people demanding the movie be locked away.
Robert Downer wore blackface in Tropic Thunder which was very recent compared to SotS and I don't see people demanding the movie be locked away.
disney4life2008
Well-Known Member
I'm not going to argue.
Tony the Tigger
Well-Known Member
The exact four words I thought when I read the post to which you replied.
Tony Perkis
Well-Known Member
Probably because people understand the context in which Tropic Thunder was operating.
Tony Perkis
Well-Known Member
I‘d react to this, but my ability to do so was taken away for doing so to people who deserved the reactions they got.
And what's the context of the SotS? It's a freaking fantasy film with cartoon characters. It's not claiming to be historically representative of plantation life.
Tony Perkis
Well-Known Member
First of all, let’s be clear here - Tropic Thunder never once made fun of African Americans and their related communities. The butt of the joke was always Robert Downey Jr.’s character, and his method acting style. Tropic Thunder simply chose the most ridiculous scenario to portray this. Offensive without context? Sure, but it’s actually pretty great comedic commentary on Hollywood ten years ago, and still to this day, of the ludicrous lengths actors will go.
Song of the South operates under a very different set of parameters. Uncle Remus still operates as a character on a plantation, still associated with his theoretical slave family. That signifies a lack of forward movement, which while probably meant to be a wholesome film with him and the kids, comes across very differently.
I do think Song of the South should be available for viewing on adult-oriented streaming services (say....Hulu) because I think it’s wrong to hide history. Disney doesn’t have to endorse it, but it is a part of the company’s, and more importantly popular culture‘s, history. The recent past revision act they’ve pulled is largely bothersome, especially as they’ve gotten bigger.
EDIT: Additionally, I don’t think downplaying the impact of the film simply because it is Disney and contains animated characters does anybody any good. That’s lazy dismissal.
Last edited:
SotS takes place after the Civil War. Yes it's plantation life but he isn't a slave, hence the more friendly interactions between him and the plantation owners. Is the movie perhaps a bit too jovial? Maybe.
I'm not sure I understand your criticism either about "a lack of forward movement." The year was 1946.
Tony Perkis
Well-Known Member
You’re pretty much leaning into the main issue with the film.
It‘s 1946. He’s still on a plantation. He still exists to entertain the kids of a white family that owns the property. The lack of forward movement is the fact that he’s still there, several years after slavery was abolished.
I don’t think Disney meant anything malicious in this film, but I do think woeful ignorance played a significant factor.
Last edited:
What sort of career opportunities do you think existed for an older former slave just after the Civil War?
Tony Perkis
Well-Known Member
The Civil War ended in 1865, which was 81 years prior to this film.
Slavery was abolished that same year.
They had ample opportunity to portray land ownership, independent life with family, and more. You need a better rebuttal than the one you‘re providing, especially when defending a pie in the sky Disney film.
I can't understand what you're saying. The movie was made in 1946, sure, and that's completely irrelevant to the fact that SotS was a movie about plantation life very shortly after the Civil War. Did you want that movie to not show any black people? Did you want an alternate history movie showing Uncle Remus as the plantation owner? I'm honestly not sure what you're trying to say.
Tony Perkis
Well-Known Member
I didn’t want anything from a Song of the South movie.
On its own, it’s just not very good nor worthy of much consideration, and if not for the tone deaf racial components, it would be largely forgotten.
I’m just explaining why people find the film a bit troubling and problematic. Especially since the main character was born after the Civil War, and let’s be frank, this film isn’t an accurate representation of life.
Magenta Panther
Well-Known Member
Maybe take up your idiot assertion with the likes of Floyd Norman, African-American animator who worked with Walt on Sleeping Beauty and Jungle Book, and who has steadfastly defended Walt against moronic comments like yours.
Walt was not a racist. Stick it.
Magenta Panther
Well-Known Member
Song of the South is a problematic film in light of today's cancel-culture "sensibilities". But Gone With The Wind is far more offensive in terms of depictions of blacks, yet nobody has stuck it in a vault and refused to air it.
I maintain that if SotS was subjected to a little judicious editing, it would be fine. Although, for some people, "judicious editing" would involve cutting out Uncle Remus entirely. I'm sure Oscar-winner James Baskett, the actor who portrayed Remus, would be thrilled about that. (By the way, when he found out that Baskett went into the hospital after SotS wrapped, "racist" Walt Disney paid for all of his hospital bills. Baskett's wife wrote to Walt: "You have certainly been a friend indeed, and we have certainly been in need".)
So again, to all who call Walt a racist: Stick it!
I maintain that if SotS was subjected to a little judicious editing, it would be fine. Although, for some people, "judicious editing" would involve cutting out Uncle Remus entirely. I'm sure Oscar-winner James Baskett, the actor who portrayed Remus, would be thrilled about that. (By the way, when he found out that Baskett went into the hospital after SotS wrapped, "racist" Walt Disney paid for all of his hospital bills. Baskett's wife wrote to Walt: "You have certainly been a friend indeed, and we have certainly been in need".)
So again, to all who call Walt a racist: Stick it!
Captain Barbossa
Well-Known Member
I have a copy of Song of the South, though I haven't watched it in a few years. I also have a couple of the Nights with Uncle Remus books written by Joel Chandler Harris, which I enjoyed reading as a kid. In terms of the movie, I love it and think it's great. Say what you want about it, but Song of the South is one of the most important films ever made. It was the first to combine live-action and animation in the same film, which helped lay the foundation for Mary Poppins, Who Framed Roger Rabbit?, and other films that combine live-action and animation. It's historically significant in the world of film making, and while the chances are very slim, unfortunately, I hope that one day it will get the respect that it deserves.
- Status