Splash Mountain re-theme announced

[LittleBuford]

Absolutely. That and the fact that it’s a Disney film. That being said, there is no motive being pushed in the film, nor any stereotype obvious/obnoxious enough to alter how a child would view race or racial issues. Unless you have really racist parents. Then I could see it being a problem.

A child who doesn’t know (or isn’t told) better would walk away from the film with a highly romanticised picture of what it meant to be African American in the nineteenth-century South. That to me is reason enough to keep the film out of general viewership.

 

[Brer Oswald]

A child who doesn’t know (or isn’t told) better would walk away from the film with a highly romanticised picture of what it meant to be African American in the nineteenth-century South. That to me is reason enough to keep the film out of general viewership.

I watched the film last week. They don’t really give a time or a place. Like nearly every Disney fantasy film, it isn’t meant to be realistic. If kids walk away from the film come away from the film thinking all Black people in the south Sing and Dance with cartoon Rabbits, they’re just as likely to come out of Mary Poppins thinking all British people have flying nannies that sing and dance with cartoon Penguins. Just as ridiculous and just as harmless to kids IMO.

I think the film has greater impact to be harmful and offensive to the adult audience, who over analyze and extrapolate everything.

 

[LittleBuford]

I watched the film last week. They don’t really give a time or a place. Like nearly every Disney fantasy film, it isn’t meant to be realistic. If kids walk away from the film come away from the film thinking all Black people in the south Sing and Dance with cartoon Rabbits, they’re just as likely to come out of Mary Poppins thinking all British people have flying nannies that sing and dance with cartoon Penguins. Just as ridiculous and just as harmless to kids IMO.

I think the film has greater impact to be harmful and offensive to the adult audience, who over analyze and extrapolate everything.

Millions of people still celebrate the Confederacy and downplay the horrors of slavery. Coming away from Mary Poppins with a romanticised understanding of Edwardian London is harmless; coming away from Song of the South with a romanticised understanding of plantation life is a far more serious matter, especially where children are concerned.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

A child who doesn’t know (or isn’t told) better would walk away from the film with a highly romanticised picture of what it meant to be African American in the nineteenth-century South. That to me is reason enough to keep the film out of general viewership.

And perhaps that is part of the problem...parents have far less time with their children to discuss such things these days and depend on the schools to provide nearly 100% of a child's education. IMO, schools gloss over some of the worst parts of history far too much...even as children grow older and are able to handle the truth. My 14-year-old knows more about the Holocaust than most of his peers, but only because I had done research myself to further learn about the events that occurred. Slavery and racism are next on the list. He's much like I was - history, as it's taught in schools, bores him to death, but when it's laid out in more of a story format rather then memorization of names and dates, and it's easier to see the bigger picture of what was happening globally, he's far more interested.

Honestly, I feel SotS has enough merit as art, and as an illustration of how brave Walt was in tackling such a sensitive topic in the era in which he did, that it should never be hidden away as if it's something to be ashamed about. The last scene of the film is the one we are meant to take to heart - friendship and caring regardless of race - and that was a pretty bold statement in 1946.

 

[Brer Oswald]

Millions of people still celebrate the Confederacy and downplay the horrors of slavery. Coming away from Mary Poppins with a romanticised understanding of Edwardian London is harmless; coming away from Song of the South with a romanticised understanding of plantation life is a far more serious matter, especially where children are concerned.

I’m sorry. I still don’t see it. A kid today isn’t going to know what slavery or “plantation life” even is, let alone even care what it is. The only thing from the film that I could see potentially being a negative influence on the younger audience is the dialect.

 

[Brer Oswald]

And perhaps that is part of the problem...parents have far less time with their children to discuss such things these days and depend on the schools to provide nearly 100% of a child's education. IMO, schools gloss over some of the worst parts of history far too much...even as children grow older and are able to handle the truth. My 14-year-old knows more about the Holocaust than most of his peers, but only because I had done research myself to further learn about the events that occurred. Slavery and racism are next on the list. He's much like I was - history, as it's taught in schools, bores him to death, but when it's laid out in more of a story format rather then memorization of names and dates, and it's easier to see the bigger picture of what was happening globally, he's far more interested.

Honestly, I feel SotS has enough merit as art, and as an illustration of how brave Walt was in tackling such a sensitive topic in the era in which he did, that it should never be hidden away as if it's something to be ashamed about. The last scene of the film is the one we are meant to take to heart - friendship and caring regardless of race - and that was a pretty bold statement in 1946.

The last segment is beautiful. And in my opinion, it’s a very beautiful film most of the time. I know that there are some flaws. But to me the good outweighs the bad.

As for it being a teaching point, I first learned about black face and racism in Hollywood from a Mickey Mouse DVD. Yes, it was produced in the Eisner Era.

 

[LittleBuford]

Honestly, I feel SotS has enough merit as art, and as an illustration of how brave Walt was in tackling such a sensitive topic in the era in which he did, that it should never be hidden away as if it's something to be ashamed about. The last scene of the film is the one we are meant to take to heart - friendship and caring regardless of race - and that was a pretty bold statement in 1946.

I disagree. Apart from the animated sequences, it's a mediocre film and was recognised as such by critics of the time. Nor was it especially bold, given that it was criticised even upon its release for romanticising plantation life. The only thing daring about it is its brilliant combination of live action and animation.

 

[LittleBuford]

A kid today isn’t going to know what slavery or “plantation life” even is, let alone even care what it is.

This statement really surprises me. Don't American children learn about slavery?

 

[ImperfectPixie]

This statement really surprises me. Don't American children learn about slavery?

My 14-year-old just informed me that they'd spent a couple of months talking about it during this last school year - before it got cancelled.

 

[Brer Panther]

because of food and merchandise tie ins.

This brings to mind a quote from @Magenta Panther from a thread back in 2016...

There's a story about Walt Disney that one of his Imagineers, Rolly Crump, likes to tell. Once he, Walt, and Walt's staff were discussing the Country Bears Jamboree attraction. One of his staff, a marketing guy, suggested that a t-shirt store be placed near the attraction. Walt didn't like that idea. As the discussions continued, the marketing guy kept pushing the idea. When he said, for the third time "T-shirts make a lot of money, Walt," Walt turned to him and said, "Mr. (Whoever), the tail does not wag the dog!"

Well, that was Walt's company. But in the Robert Iger Company, the tail DOES wag the dog, and that tail is Marketing

He's right. In the Robert Iger Company, the tail does indeed wag the dog. And that tail is indeed marketing and merchandising. Little did we know that their plot to stick Guardians of the Galaxy in the Tower of Terror was just the beginning.

 

[Brer Oswald]

This statement really surprises me. Don't American children learn about slavery?

Might be part of the reason I really don’t understand the viewpoint on the film. I’m not American. I didn’t know much of anything about slavery until doing research on the film.

 

[Brer Oswald]

This brings to mind a quote from @Magenta Panther from a thread back in 2016...


He's right. In the Robert Iger Company, the tail does indeed wag the dog. And that tail is indeed marketing and merchandising. Little did we know that their plot to stick Guardians of the Galaxy in the Tower of Terror was just the beginning.

Magenta Panther is crazy 50% of the time (no offence, I am too), but that statement is bang on.

 

[manmythlegend]

A child who doesn’t know (or isn’t told) better would walk away from the film with a highly romanticised picture of what it meant to be African American in the nineteenth-century South. That to me is reason enough to keep the film out of general viewership.

This is flawed simplistic logic. It's up to adults to educate children, not fantasy movies. Just the same as when a child plays a shooter video game. Do they come out thinking shooting is pretty fun and cool? Perhaps. And adults will (at least should) be there to explain why shooting isn't cool.

 

[Brer Oswald]

This is flawed simplistic logic. It's up to adults to educate children, not fantasy movies. Just the same as when a child plays a shooter video game. Do they come out thinking shooting is pretty fun and cool? Perhaps. And adults will (at least should) be there to explain why shooting isn't cool.

I jump around like Mario and run like Sonci the Hedgehog. So I guess there is a problem there.

 

[LittleBuford]

This is flawed simplistic logic. It's up to adults to educate children, not fantasy movies. Just the same as when a child plays a shooter video game. Do they come out thinking shooting is pretty fun and cool? Perhaps. And adults will (at least should) be there to explain why shooting isn't cool.

I agree with the bolded. But how many parents would discuss slavery and its aftermath with their children after showing them a Disney movie? The Disney brand just isn't associated with such controversial topics, and for good reason.

 

[Brer Oswald]

I agree with the bolded. But how many parents would discuss slavery and its aftermath with their children after showing them a Disney movie? The Disney brand just isn't associated with such controversial topics, and for good reason.

But SotS isn’t about Slavery.

 

[LittleBuford]

But SotS isn’t about Slavery.

Which is why I wrote "and its aftermath". The film is set on a plantation. All the Black characters (apart from the youngest children) are recently freed slaves, still working on the land and in the house of their former mistress, and still treating her with slavish deference.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

Which is why I wrote "and its aftermath". The film is set on a plantation. All the Black characters (apart from the youngest children) are recently freed slaves, still working on the land and in the house of their former mistress, and still treating her with slavish deference.

Young children wouldn't realize that's what they were looking at. They have no frame of reference in their minds to relate the live scenes in the film to slavery.

 

[manmythlegend]

I agree with the bolded. But how many parents would discuss slavery and its aftermath with their children after showing them a Disney movie? The Disney brand just isn't associated with such controversial topics, and for good reason.

Adults means any adult which could involve teachers and educators at schools that will no doubt cover the topic of slavery.

Listen if a 6 year old watches SotS, a parent doesn't need to immediately address slavery with the 6 year old. They can cover it a later time when the child has a stronger ability to fully understand the subject.

 

[LittleBuford]

Young children wouldn't realize that's what they were looking at. They have no frame of reference in their minds to relate the live scenes in the film to slavery.

That is a problem rather than a good thing.