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.
FWIW the movie is available on Amazon from 3rd party dealers.
The PBS American Experience episode about Walt Disney had a little section devoted to Song of the South that I think is pretty relevant to this thread. The issue with the film isn't the Brer Rabbit stories. It's that the live action bits make slavery seem like a good time for all involved. Apparently Walt was told by those in the Civil Rights community at the time what he needed to do to make the film in a way that wouldn't offend people and he did pretty much exactly the opposite. (And then held the opening for the film at a segregated theater so that none of the black cast members could attend). It would be interesting to see what Whoopi's take is.
So the African Americans in it are sharecroppers, not slaves.
I haven't seen the movie so I have no idea when it takes place. I am merely relaying what I learned on PBS, which is that people were offended by the live action sequences, not the animation. The live action sequences were thought to be pro slavery. I would imagine people had their reasons for feeling that way, but since I am unlikely to ever see the movie, I have no way of verifying one way or another.
(ETA: This is not only what the documentary said, but what actually happened. I did further research, and it seems that reviewers at the time the film was released assumed that the story took place before Reconstruction. This led to an uproar over whether the film promoted an idealized view of slavery).
To me, the interesting bit is that Disney took the time to solicit input in how not to offend people, but then disregarded that advice.
People do also have other concerns about dialect, stereotypical presentation of characters, etc. -- all pretty much limited to the live action sequences.
As someone just old enough to remember when many of the stereotypes used in the film were finally going away in real life, I can say watching the live-action sections can be cringe-inducing. The fact that some people no longer understand why is a testament to these stereotypes being largely eradicated for younger generations but also alarming that some people never understood how offensive they were in the first place.
Walt's SOTS would have been huge in 1939, but in 1948, after WWII and the Holocaust, audiences were far less receptive to what had been a winning formula for portraying Africa-Americans for Gone With the Wind.
(Edited to trim)
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.
Wait! What? Are you suggesting that Disney films aren't a reflection of reality? In that light, should we criticize The Princess & The Frog because it doesn't properly reflect the reality of race relations in 1920's New Orleans?The time of SotS and the "happy but uneducated folkish sharecropper" just isn't an acceptable storyline. The period was really defined by Black Flight from the South, especially from the late 1870s on, the rise of the KKK, the lynching of 4000 African Americans over 80 years, an institutionalization of racism in all levels of society, and the establishment of laws and unwritten rules designed to keep African Americans as low down the economic and social totem pole as was possible. Never forget that in Hinds County MS for a period of almost 4 years from 1869 until the mid 1870s, the county averaged one slaying of a black man per day. And that in 1868 in Louisiana, almost 1100 mostly black men and women were slaughtered over a few months.
Wait! What? Are you suggesting that Disney films aren't a reflection of reality? In that light, should we criticize The Princess & The Frog because it doesn't properly reflect the reality of race relations in 1920's New Orleans?
I'm of the opinion that we can come to terms that our history is less than crystal clean, without trying to wash it from existence.
America is the most diverse country by far, it's not even close. We have to deal with a lot more acceptance of diversity than any other country in the world, and it's just human nature to have problems with people that are different.
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.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.