Whoopi wants Song of the South released

[Disneymom1126]

Here's the problem with that argument... It's highly doubtful that person not familiar with the stereotypes of concern in SotS would decide to ingrain them personally based on watching this film, particularly when it's so easy to see that they doesn't mesh with the world they see around them today. I think we need to give people a little more credit than that.

FWIW, I agree that there's zero chance that Disney would release this film again in the foreseeable future... particularly given the events in this country in the last few months. But I think it's a shame that it has to be that way when it doesn't have to be.

That is assuming someone can always decide what influences them. I lived in a city before moving to a very rural town, and I can tell you my friends that had never left that rural town were afraid of cities (and the people who lived in them). All they knew of the "city" was crime. We took a school trip to a city for band when I was in 10th grade and everyone was afraid they were going to get mugged - like genuinely afraid. We are influenced by things all the time that we don't realize we are influenced by - I just happen to think this would be something that would further reinforce stereotypes that people in some areas still hold on to. I hope, as you pointed out, that seeing the movie would cause some dissonance in people - particularly those who have had personal interactions with people who are different from them or live in a more-diverse area, but I also think there are a lot of communities that are still very isolated and still hold on to some pretty strong race-based biases and that this would further reinforce them. Not necessarily in a recognizable way, but rather they would further more implicit biases.

 

[wonder whisper]

The trouble in my opinion in putting this out in mass-circulation is that in the vast majority of households, what I wrote above is not what would happen. Instead, it would just further reinforce stereotypes, especially for people who live in secluded locations and do not interact with people who are different from them..

Actually, the stereotype that is increasingly visible in this thread is that of a new level of intolerance among a segment of the population that wants to mandate what people can and can't be exposed to - and which increasingly demonizes anyone who dares to disagree with that.

What they need to be reminded of is our bill rights grants us many precious freedoms.

But that the "right to demand something they are offended by be removed/hidden/banned" is not one of them.

 

[jknezek]

Actually, the stereotype that is increasingly visible in this thread is that of a new level of intolerance among a segment of the population that wants to mandate what people can and can't be exposed to - and which increasingly demonizes anyone who dares to disagree with them.

What they need to be reminded of is our bill rights grants us many precious freedoms.

But that the "right to demand something they are offended by be removed/hidden/banned" is not one of them.

I think this might be one of the strangest things I've ever read on these boards, and that is saying something. No one is demanding they don't show SotS on this thread. Disney is CHOOSING not to be associated with this movie in this market anymore. It is up to them. Some of us agree and accept that Disney gains NOTHING by being associated with this movie anymore except as a historical curiosity. But no one is demanding they keep it locked up.

This is in Disney's best interest as a company, and that is why they are choosing not to re-release it.

 

[rteetz]

Let's remain civil please, I don't want to have to close this thread.

 

[LizzyS]

I always found it "interesting" that the Bre'er Rabbit tar baby cartoon segment was fine to keep showing, but not the whole movie.

 

[wonder whisper]

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

The rarest SOTS laserdic release was the 1990 one made solely for distribution in Hong Kong. Separate English and Cantonese sounds track with no subtitles and flawless video. This was the one used to dub the dvd copy I have.

 

[wonder whisper]

No one is demanding they don't show SotS on this thread.

With all due respect, several people in the discussion are implying exactly that, either by making the typical mistake of saying it is set during slavery and/or that people shouldn't be exposed to it because it will lead them to accept “bad stereotypes.” Examples:

Wareagle 57: “I've heard for it is that it makes it seem like slaves were happy to be slaves, thus making people think slavery wasn't that bad.”

Jess S: (who admits to not ever having seen the movie) ” the live action bits make slavery seem like a good time for all involved”

And in your own opinion (yes, opinion, not fact) “The time of SotS and the "happy but uneducated folkish sharecropper" just isn't an acceptable storyline.”

 

[jknezek]

With all due respect, several people in the discussion are implying exactly that, either by making the typical mistake of saying it is set during slavery and/or that people shouldn't be exposed to it because it will lead them to accept “bad stereotypes.” Examples:

Wareagle 57: “I've heard for it is that it makes it seem like slaves were happy to be slaves, thus making people think slavery wasn't that bad.”

Jess S: (who admits to not ever having seen the movie) ” the live action bits make slavery seem like a good time for all involved”

And in your own opinion (yes, opinion, not fact) “The time of SotS and the "happy but uneducated folkish sharecropper" just isn't an acceptable storyline.”

And none of that is a demand for it never to get shown. They are all justifications for Disney keeping it in the vault. I have no desire to ban it. I don't believe in banning creative endevours even when I think they are no longer appropriate. They can be quite good teaching tools. I do think Disney is completely justified in not wanting their family friendly company associated with the inappropriate stereotypes in the movie. Your quotes don't prove your point at all, just that you have a point of view you'd like to twist words to support for some reason.

 

[adam.adbe]

What they need to be reminded of is our bill rights grants us many precious freedoms.

It grants Disney a pretty important one too.

 

[wonder whisper]

And none of that is a demand for it never to get shown. They are all justifications for Disney keeping it in the vault. I have no desire to ban it. I don't believe in banning creative endevours even when I think they are no longer appropriate. They can be quite good teaching tools. I do think Disney is completely justified in not wanting their family friendly company associated with the inappropriate stereotypes in the movie. Your quotes don't prove your point at all, just that you have a point of view you'd like to twist words to support for some reason.

As I and others pointed out earlier in this discussion, the statement the film is "in the vault" is twisting words to imply something is hidden away and unobtainable, which is an absolute myth regarding SOTS, which is readily available to anyone who wants to see it it (FYI the days when people had to wait for "official" releases of media died the day YouTube and video capture technology arrived).

And the quotes in my earlier post most certainly do show that both misinformation about the setting of the film and subjective perceptions of characterizations in it are being spread by those who have decided it should be kept on a permanent universal blacklist (no pun intended for the literal ). Frankly, I don't care if Disney continues to pretend this film doesn't exist. The bottom line is it does and the more some people try to make it forbidden fruit, the more attention gets drawn to it.

 

[jknezek]

As I and others pointed out earlier in this discussion, the statement the film is "in the vault" is twisting words to imply something is hidden away and unobtainable, which is an absolute myth regarding SOTS, which is readily available to anyone who wants to see it it (FYI the days when people had to wait for "official" releases of media died the day YouTube and video capture technology arrived).

And the quotes in my earlier post most certainly do show that both misinformation about the setting of the film and subjective perceptions of characterizations in it are being spread by those who have decided it should be kept on a permanent universal blacklist (no pun intended for the literal ). Frankly, I don't care if Disney continues to pretend this film doesn't exist. The bottom line is it does and the more some people try to make it forbidden fruit, the more attention gets drawn to it.

I don't care if you can find bootleg copies of it or not. I care, as a shareholder, that Disney doesn't officially release it except as a teaching tool. I am more than happy to show it to my own kids when they are old enough to watch it critically and talk about it.

Disney is doing the right thing, as far as I am concerned by not releasing this film commercially. That is in their best interests and what is best for the company reputation. What people choose to do on their own is up to them. The small amount of money Disney is forgoing in terms of bootlegged copies is nothing compared to the reputation damage and bad p.r. they would get, and deserve, if they widely released this movie without providing some kind of larger critical component.

Not releasing it commercially versus banning are two completely separate things. One is a choice of the rights holder, the other removes the choice of the right holder. It is a very important and powerful distinction.

 

[Jim Shuler]

Any thoughts? It seems she wants to use this and the Dumbo crows as teaching tools. I understand her reasoning, however I don't see Disney letting Song out of the vault. Ever.
https://www.yahoo.com/movies/whoopi...sation-controversial-1946-film-154030256.html

Seems to me there are a lot of other things Whoopie should be worried about. Chicago has a big problem with shootings on the south side and maybe she could worry about that.

 

[Capang]

Seems to me there are a lot of other things Whoopie should be worried about. Chicago has a big problem with shootings on the south side and maybe she could worry about that.

Agreed. I think sometimes it's easier to argue about the past than it is to solve the current problems we face.

 

[Jim Shuler]

The GWTW cancellation you mentioned was by a single obscure art house theatre. I haven't hear about any other blacklistings of the film, which is regularly shown on TCM. As for that one cancellation, the limited press on it quoted some spokesperson giving the the usual generic, vague boilerplate that the showing was cancelled because there were concerns the film "might offend."

I do agree that the censorship slipperly slope is getting worse, a prime example being Disney owned ESPN recently pulling an Asian sportscaster named "Robert Lee" from being of the commentator on the William and Mary vs. U of Virginia game. That bone headed move actually backfired, drawing a huge amount of criticism and ridicule of the network (some of which was entertaining, such as one observer stating ESPN would be instituting a policy to never broadcast any sports events held in Jacksonville, since it is named after Andrew Jackson, who did at one time own slaves).

Iger is not thru with the purges at his companies. He seems to be a very narrow closed minded individual.

 

[jknezek]

Seems to me there are a lot of other things Whoopie should be worried about. Chicago has a big problem with shootings on the south side and maybe she could worry about that.

Do you only have one thing on your mind at a time? I know I'm capable of being concerned about more than one. But when Whoopi is at a Disney event and asked about Disney things, it's kind of appropriate she respond with a Disney relevant issue. I know we like to be hyper critical, especially of celebrities who don't share our politics, but if you watch the video where these remarks happened, at D23, it really would have been a lot stranger for her to be bringing up the issues in Chicago than to talk about a Disney movie.

Context is important people.

 

[Jim Shuler]

Yep. That's exactly what I'm saying. Of course it is. It has nothing to do with the fact that the happy sharecropper in SotS is based on a bunch of idiotic and offensive stereotypes that aren't used anymore.

The fact that people can't seem to understand the cultural stereotypes displayed by Uncle Remus aren't really something the Disney company wants to be affiliated with anymore indicates a complete lack of common sense and critical thinking skills. I get that it was produced at a different time. But it's simply not going to help Disney's p.r. goals to stand behind this film. And for companies, public relations are important.

Actually Disney has made decisions in which they are not concerned about offending some in the country. The nastiness and leftward move on ESPN and other Disney venues is bothering a lot of people others either aren't aware of it, ignore it, or think it is okay.

 

[Jim Shuler]

Do you only have one thing on your mind at a time? I know I'm capable of being concerned about more than one. But when Whoopi is at a Disney event and asked about Disney things, it's kind of appropriate she respond with a Disney relevant issue. I know we like to be hyper critical, especially of celebrities who don't share our politics, but if you watch the video where these remarks happened, at D23, it really would have been a lot stranger for her to be bringing up the issues in Chicago than to talk about a Disney movie.

Context is important people.

Whoopi was not responding to a relevant issue except to her and maybe a few others. The context was to stir up controversy not to solve problems. She had a wonderful platform and didn't take advantage of it. The context of my post was that Whoopi should be proactive in helping to solve some destructive and unsavory problems that adversely effect people more than a movie form the 40's. One would be beneficial one seems to be another issue to divide us.

 

[jknezek]

Whoopi was not responding to a relevant issue except to her and maybe a few others. The context was to stir up controversy not to solve problems. She had a wonderful platform and didn't take advantage of it. The context of my post was that Whoopi should be proactive in helping to solve some destructive and unsavory problems that adversely effect people more than a movie form the 40's. One would be beneficial one seems to be another issue to divide us.

Considering Iger gets asked occasionally at shareholder events when he is going to release SotS and there are whole groups devoted to getting it released online plus petitions, I think it's a Disney relevant issue. Are those people also stirring up controversy and failing to solve problems? People have different things they care about, it's part of what makes the world go round. The people asking Iger at a Disney shareholder meeting and Whoopi, for all her never ending political speech, brought up their concerns in relevant times and places. Speaking about Chicago's violence problems at D23, which is what was suggested above, would certainly have been out of place.

 

[Jim Shuler]

Considering Iger gets asked occasionally at shareholder events when he is going to release SotS and there are whole groups devoted to getting it released online plus petitions, I think it's a Disney relevant issue. Are those people also stirring up controversy and failing to solve problems? People have different things they care about, it's part of what makes the world go round. The people asking Iger at a Disney shareholder meeting and Whoopi, for all her never ending political speech, brought up their concerns in relevant times and places. Speaking about Chicago's violence problems at D23, which is what was suggested above, would certainly have been out of place.

As a Disney shareholder I can assure you the release of SofS is not an important topic of conversation or concern. Did they ask Whoopi about SofS or did she pick that topic out of the blue? Sounds like she was out of context with the ceremony and the award she was given. As a shareholder I did not approve of Whoopi receiving any special awards. She has a small audience and appeals to a very small segment of our population.

 

[jknezek]

As a Disney shareholder I can assure you the release of SofS is not an important topic of conversation or concern. Did they ask Whoopi about SofS or did she pick that topic out of the blue? Sounds like she was out of context with the ceremony and the award she was given. As a shareholder I did not approve of Whoopi receiving any special awards. She has a small audience and appeals to a very small segment of our population.

You seem to be confusing what is important to you with what is important to other people. As a shareholder I agree that I am fine with the non-release of SotS. I have seen times when Iger has been questioned by people who do find it a concern. Whoopi was asked about her favorite Disney movies and brought SotS up in that context, as a movie that can have a great message when looked at critically as a learning tool. As for the ceremony and honoring her... she has had many Disney roles over the years. I have no problem with her being honored even though I don't agree with much of her politics. It takes all types to make the world go round. Having an outspoken liberal view on politics, or an outspoken conservative view, would have no effect on whether I think someone should be honored for their acting roles in Disney movies. I am capable of separating those two things.