Whoopi wants Song of the South released

[StarWarsJez]

Yes, but perhaps in a couple years when they try and up it to 120 years (or such) the courts will stop the continual gaming of the system. I think they will only get so many bites at that apple.

Let's hope so. Bottom line is copyright is only as long as it is because Disney paid to change a law in order to fully protect their "assets".

 

[mcjaco]

I think the only English version released was on a laser in Japan. Right channel was English and left channel in Japanese (?).

It's possible. My Father had a employee that was a movie/audiophile. He had a set up that could play just about anything, from any region....and that was back in the 80s. We had Tron, the Star Wars Trilogy, Close Encounters, etc. way before they were ever available, because he'd make us copies from his collection.

 

[Josh Hendy]

The Brer Rabbit and Brer Fox stuff is racist in an unintentionally racist awful but sort of amusing way, but the human stuff on the movie is just awful.

I thought that the Brer Rabbit cartoons were the least controversial part of the movie. Arguably, Brer Rabbit is a "black" character who outsmarts Brer Fox and Brer Bear who are "white" bullies. But that might say more about my own assumptions than it says about the intentions of the filmmakers.

It's no different than Bugs Bunny ... similar characters and situations, and the accents used by the voice actors are the only guide that people can use to "read" the political message ... of which there is hardly any.

The "tar baby" episode is fairly bizarre but it's an old legend that has no racist implications at all. Later on the phrase became a racist term so retroactively the movie is ... you know ... tarred with that brush (sorry).

 

[whiporee]

I thought that the Brer Rabbit cartoons were the least controversial part of the movie. Arguably, Brer Rabbit is a "black" character who outsmarts Brer Fox and Brer Bear who are "white" bullies. But that might say more about my own assumptions than it says about the intentions of the filmmakers.

It's no different than Bugs Bunny ... similar characters and situations, and the accents used by the voice actors are the only guide that people can use to "read" the political message ... of which there is hardly any.

The "tar baby" episode is fairly bizarre but it's an old legend that has no racist implications at all. Later on the phrase became a racist term so retroactively the movie is ... you know ... tarred with that brush (sorry).

I don't think any of the characters are intended to be white -- Bre'er Fox and Bear are just other stereotypes. Kind of like there were no non-stereotypes on Amos and Andy -- you just had different kids of stereotypes of black people.

That whole pickaninny stereotype was pretty common in movies and culture for a long time after Reconstruction. The crows in Dumbo, and the Jazz Singer and the helpful salves in Gone with the Wind. I think those are South-specific racial stereotypes, really designed to show the freed slaves as non threatening objects of amusement -- a little slow, good natured, lazy -- instead of being threats to white people. But that's just the take of my cultural history professor 30 years ago, so he could have been wrong.

 

[wonder whisper]

I think the idea that you can't handle a piece of fiction that was written in a different time is ridiculous...people need to grow up.

If I could quadruple like this comment, I would. Revisionist erasure of history is a cancer.

 

[wonder whisper]

I see your SotS and raise you The Black Cauldron.

Bingo - anyone who thinks SOtS is the biggest stinker Disney ever produced is obviously not well read on the drivel released in the late 60s and early 70s.

 

[wonder whisper]

They should just release the Brer Rabbit shorts standalone.
.

I disagree with doing that, the reasons why requiring a separate discussion.

As for the bemoaning of the film being unavailable, it isn't since the horse left the barn years ago. SOTS DVDs dubbed from the rare Hong Kong laser disc release (generally considered by aficionados as the most pristine available source) have been readily available from a plethora of aftermarket sources for well over a decade.

Notably, Disney does nothing to enforce it's copyright on the film and never goes after the sellers of these discs. I suspect the reason why is their legal counsel decided going down the path of litigating to protect their copyright would only result in drawing attention to a film management wants to bury and and runs the risk of creating negative PR.

And back to my original point, which is that this film is readily available to anyone seeking it out. The effort by Whoopi for an official re-release (which is laudable) is unfortunately going to be fruitless. Iger is uber PC /risk averse and will never entertain doing that.

 

[wonder whisper]

I disagree with doing that, the reasons why requiring a separate discussion. As for the bemoaning of the film being unavailable, it isn't since the horse left the barn years ago. SOTS DVDs dubbed from the Japanese laser disc release (generally considered by aficionados as the most pristine available source) have been readily available from a plethora of aftermarket sources for well over a decade.

Notably, Disney does nothing to enforce it's copyright on the film and never goes after the sellers of these discs. I suspect the reason why is their legal counsel decided going down the path of litigating to protect their copyright is only going to draw attention to a film management wants to bury and and runs the risk of opening up a PR mess.

And back to my original point: this film is already available to anyone seeking it out. The effort by Whoopi to argue for an official Disney re-release (which is laudable) is unfortunately going to be fruitless. Iger is uber PC/risk averse and will never entertain that.

 

[adam.adbe]

We were the first country to actually make slavery illegal. We realized we were doing something wrong, we admitted it to ourselves, and we fixed it.

Off the top of my head:

The United Kingdom:Slavery Abolition Act 1833 (1843 before full abolition).
France: 1848 (it took the French a few tries to get it right).

Slavery in the US was of course abolished with the 13th amendment in 1863.

I'm pretty sure there are countries that banned slavery long before the UK and France, and France actually banned slavery on its own shores as early as the 1300s.

 

[Indio]

Don't want to get anyone in trouble, but a gift shop in Savannah sells the DVD, in case anyone is interested. Back in the 1980's I attended a special screening of the film. A film historian and crew member gave a presentation on this historical context of the stories, Disney's issues in making the film, and technical aspects of the process. They also held a discussion following the showing. I don't recall anyone thinking it was racist or inappropriate. Mostly people just liked seeing the old Uncle Remus stories come to life. Some people have made a career in finding offense in everything. Time to stop indulging them. Release the film.

Several years ago, we also found the DVD in a book store in North Georgia. They had a lot of copies and they were selling like hotcakes. We bought our copy and we enjoyed the movie.

 

[adam.adbe]

I think the idea that you can't handle a piece of fiction that was written in a different time is ridiculous...people need to grow up.

True, but is there *any* upside for Disney in dragging this one out of the vault. What people should b able to handle, and what companies are smart to step away from are two different things. Most people don't avoid Hugo Boss because they once made stylish togs for the SS, but Hugo Boss aren't about to start showcasing the sharp styles of the 1930s in their next winter catalog.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

True, but is there *any* upside for Disney in dragging this one out of the vault. What people should b able to handle, and what companies are smart to step away from are two different things. Most people don't avoid Hugo Boss because they once made stylish togs for the SS, but Hugo Boss aren't about to start showcasing the sharp styles of the 1930s in their next winter catalog.

Not really...but people need to grow the hell up

 

[wonder whisper]

Several years ago, we also found the DVD in a book store in North Georgia. They had a lot of copies and they were selling like hotcakes. We bought our copy and we enjoyed the movie.

Not surprising. As I mentioned in an earlier post, this film has been readily available from aftermarket sources to anyone seeking it out for well over a decade.

 

[wonder whisper]

True, but is there *any* upside for Disney in dragging this one out of the vault. What people should b able to handle, and what companies are smart to step away from are two different things. Most people don't avoid Hugo Boss because they once made stylish togs for the SS, but Hugo Boss aren't about to start showcasing the sharp styles of the 1930s in their next winter catalog.

Very good points supported by an excellent analogy.

But note that keeping SOTS in the vault isn't making endless discussion on why it is being hidden go away. Whoopi has done a useful service by in essence acting as a gadfly -- one visible to a large mass market audience -- that is reminding management in Anaheim that they do not have full control over of either the awareness of this particular production item nor continuing public discussion on why it is "verboten."

 

[wonder whisper]

Off the top of my head:

The United Kingdom:Slavery Abolition Act 1833 (1843 before full abolition).
France: 1848 (it took the French a few tries to get it right).

Slavery in the US was of course abolished with the 13th amendment in 1863.

I'm pretty sure there are countries that banned slavery long before the UK and France, and France actually banned slavery on its own shores as early as the 1300s.

Useful factiods, but what relevance do they have to a film that is set during reconstruction?

 

[Uncleromulus]

Hope it does happen. Apparently only those of us in the US aren't able to buy this.

I got my copy some years ago-

 

[Uncleromulus]

I thought that the Brer Rabbit cartoons were the least controversial part of the movie. Arguably, Brer Rabbit is a "black" character who outsmarts Brer Fox and Brer Bear who are "white" bullies. But that might say more about my own assumptions than it says about the intentions of the filmmakers.

It's no different than Bugs Bunny ... similar characters and situations, and the accents used by the voice actors are the only guide that people can use to "read" the political message ... of which there is hardly any.

The "tar baby" episode is fairly bizarre but it's an old legend that has no racist implications at all. Later on the phrase became a racist term so retroactively the movie is ... you know ... tarred with that brush (sorry).

The film makers had no agenda or intentions except to make a movie--and a good one I might add--out of the Brer Rabbit stories.

 

[wonder whisper]

I thought that the Brer Rabbit cartoons were the least controversial part of the movie. Arguably, Brer Rabbit is a "black" character who outsmarts Brer Fox and Brer Bear who are "white" bullies. But that might say more about my own assumptions than it says about the intentions of the filmmakers.

It's no different than Bugs Bunny ... similar characters and situations, and the accents used by the voice actors are the only guide that people can use to "read" the political message ... of which there is hardly any.

The "tar baby" episode is fairly bizarre but it's an old legend that has no racist implications at all. Later on the phrase became a racist term so retroactively the movie is ... you know ... tarred with that brush (sorry).

Just to clarify, I presume what you would classify as the "controversial" parts of the film are the plantation setting and the presence of African Americans as field hands and house servants (they are not slaves because the film is set during reconstruction). If that is correct, one wonders why other films such as "Gone With The Wind" and the 1936 version of "Showboat" that contain similar (or even "worse" antebellum southern stereotypes) get a pass.

I suspect it has something to do with Disney's perceived appeal to children.

 

[Planogirl]

Gone with the Wind isn't getting a complete pass any more. Just recently a theater cancelled showing it due to controversy and there are other small incidents. That slippery slope might just become worse and worse.

I just bought Dumbo because of quiet muttering that many films might be "cleaned up". I prefer my films intact.

 

[SeerPumpkin]

On the copyright topic, it angers me so much that Disney will do anything they can to keep those early Mickey movies while doing nothing with them. They seem like that spoiled brat who have the best toys, don't play with any of them and cry the hell out when their parents say they're gonna donate some so other people can play too. It's theirs, they don't want to use it and don't want anyone to do so too. I mean, would it hurt them too much to do a historical blu-ray with those short movies and actually let the people have access to them?