Posted: Mon Apr 04, 2005 9:14 am
I have never seen it and really want to see what all the fuss is about over the supposed racism etc... not just that though, I love live-action and animation. 
Disney, DVD, and Beyond Forums
https://dvdizzy.com/forum/
Well, Patricia A Turner says...Angelstreetpup wrote:i agree what is so racist about that movie?
http://snopes.com/disney/films/sots.htmPatricia A Turner wrote:Disney's 20th century re-creation of Harris's frame story is much more heinous than the original. The days on the plantation located in "the United States of Georgia" begin and end with unsupervised Blacks singing songs about their wonderful home as they march to and from the fields. Disney and company made no attempt to to render the music in the style of the spirituals and work songs that would have been sung during this era. They provided no indication regarding the status of the Blacks on the plantation. Joel Chandler Harris set his stories in the post-slavery era, but Disney's version seems to take place during a surreal time when Blacks lived on slave quarters on a plantation, worked diligently for no visible reward and considered Atlanta a viable place for an old Black man to set out for.
Kind old Uncle Remus caters to the needs of the young white boy whose father has inexplicably left him and his mother at the plantation. An obviously ill-kept Black child of the same age named Toby is assigned to look after the white boy, Johnny. Although Toby makes one reference to his "ma," his parents are nowhere to be seen. The African-American adults in the film pay attention to him only when he neglects his responsibilities as Johnny's playmate-keeper. He is up before Johnny in the morning in order to bring his white charge water to wash with and keep him entertained.
The boys befriend a little blond girl, Ginny, whose family clearly represents the neighborhood's white trash. Although Johnny coaxes his mother into inviting Ginny to his fancy birthday party at the big house, Toby is curiously absent from the party scenes. Toby is good enough to catch frogs with, but not good enough to have birthday cake with. When Toby and Johnny are with Uncle Remus, the gray-haired Black man directs most of his attention to the white child. Thus Blacks on the plantation are seen as willingly subservient to the whites to the extent that they overlook the needs of their own children. When Johnny's mother threatens to keep her son away from the old gentleman's cabin, Uncle Remus is so hurt that he starts to run away. In the world that Disney made, the Blacks sublimate their own lives in order to be better servants to the white family. If Disney had truly understood the message of the tales he animated so delightfully, he would have realized the extent of distortion of the frame story.
Patricia A TurnerĀ® is a moron. She complains about the black kid not being invited to the birthday party. Does this woman know ANYTHING about American history? Do you think the black kid would have been invited in the year the movie takes place? How about 1900? 1920? 1950? NO! There was segregation! D'oh! The family in the movie didn't even really want the little white girl at the party, since as Miss Turner points out they are considered 'white trash.'Wonderlicious wrote:Well, Patricia A Turner says...Angelstreetpup wrote:i agree what is so racist about that movie?
http://snopes.com/disney/films/sots.htmPatricia A Turner wrote:Disney's 20th century re-creation of Harris's frame story is much more heinous than the original. The days on the plantation located in "the United States of Georgia" begin and end with unsupervised Blacks singing songs about their wonderful home as they march to and from the fields. Disney and company made no attempt to to render the music in the style of the spirituals and work songs that would have been sung during this era. They provided no indication regarding the status of the Blacks on the plantation. Joel Chandler Harris set his stories in the post-slavery era, but Disney's version seems to take place during a surreal time when Blacks lived on slave quarters on a plantation, worked diligently for no visible reward and considered Atlanta a viable place for an old Black man to set out for.
Kind old Uncle Remus caters to the needs of the young white boy whose father has inexplicably left him and his mother at the plantation. An obviously ill-kept Black child of the same age named Toby is assigned to look after the white boy, Johnny. Although Toby makes one reference to his "ma," his parents are nowhere to be seen. The African-American adults in the film pay attention to him only when he neglects his responsibilities as Johnny's playmate-keeper. He is up before Johnny in the morning in order to bring his white charge water to wash with and keep him entertained.
The boys befriend a little blond girl, Ginny, whose family clearly represents the neighborhood's white trash. Although Johnny coaxes his mother into inviting Ginny to his fancy birthday party at the big house, Toby is curiously absent from the party scenes. Toby is good enough to catch frogs with, but not good enough to have birthday cake with. When Toby and Johnny are with Uncle Remus, the gray-haired Black man directs most of his attention to the white child. Thus Blacks on the plantation are seen as willingly subservient to the whites to the extent that they overlook the needs of their own children. When Johnny's mother threatens to keep her son away from the old gentleman's cabin, Uncle Remus is so hurt that he starts to run away. In the world that Disney made, the Blacks sublimate their own lives in order to be better servants to the white family. If Disney had truly understood the message of the tales he animated so delightfully, he would have realized the extent of distortion of the frame story.
Now that depends, I've never seen Holes, however was there meant to be a commentary in there about this kind of behaviour? Because filmmakers in modern times often do that. They include something that looks like racism to prove a point and provide a commentary on that. More than likely, this is what happened with Holes as there was not a huge outcry over it (That I can remember). However, Song of the South's racist depictions are the attitudes of the time and don't provide any positive commentary on the issue. It just depicts African American slaves as being incredibly happy with their lot in life (plus other such nonsense).ichabod wrote:After seeing the movie "Holes for the first time today, I have to say that that shows more racism than Song of the South! As has been mentioned in previous posts the "racism" shown in Song of the South is not really present at all. It alls things such as Toby not being present at the party and stuff like that. Now Disney seems to think that is somehow innapropriate. Yet in Disney's 2003 film "Holes" Sam is murdered because he is a black and kisses a white woman.
Now which of those shows the most racism?
Yes I am aware of that, and that is why I was talking about straight out portrayal of racism in Disney films rather than the fact that there is the whole Slavery issue in SOTS. I guess I didn't make it clear.Jayden wrote:Now that depends, I've never seen Holes, however was there meant to be a commentary in there about this kind of behaviour? Because filmmakers in modern times often do that. They include something that looks like racism to prove a point and provide a commentary on that. More than likely, this is what happened with Holes as there was not a huge outcry over it (That I can remember). However, Song of the South's racist depictions are the attitudes of the time and don't provide any positive commentary on the issue. It just depicts African American slaves as being incredibly happy with their lot in life (plus other such nonsense).