HOME | DD
davidfoxfire — DDD 10 Feb 06
Published: 2006-02-11 00:28:33 +0000 UTC; Views: 894; Favourites: 3; Downloads: 157
Redirect to original
Description
A little something about what I was doing all week.Related content
Comments: 14
that moive,.... just too see how overacting some ppl can be,.. or to see if its true about it
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh, SOTS, you mean? Yeah. From what I heard, it'll either grate some groups the wrong way and bore other groups to sleep.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Wait, are "do'rags" part and parcel of black american life in the 21st century? I admit, I'm a little puzzled by your explantaion of that. And by Bre'er's speech; if you place it in the modern day, why does he still need to speak like the old version?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'll admit that not everything's still solid, and stupid flipping me hasn't done any research on the subject yet, being that the idea I had is still just that, an idea I filed away to get back to later, so nothing's solid on the 200X Br'er's appearance and language just yet. It's another case of "Bare with me, the Powers that Be ain't done with me yet."
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
So, you had Br'er Rabbit speak in what appears to be ebonics?
... Okay?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
[link]
Apparently it may go on sale late this year.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
^^ that's cute. why'd they ban the movie in America, though?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You only need to take a read of my entry in the wiki ( use this [link] ) to get a clue. There's another answer here at this [link] .
And I don't care what's on the record, if you're too scared of the NAACP to keep a movie out of the Vault, it's fricking banned! Iger just brought Oscar the Lucky Rabbit; Oscar is finally a Disney Character for the love of Pete; and he'd be too boycot-shocked to let out a movie that a ride at Disneyland is based on!!
Me? I'm somewhat insulated against any boycot threats: Golliping Racists like David Duke stand a couple rungs above unpopular Sailor Moon fanfictionists like yours truly. Especially those who made them as an alternative to shooting up their school. Heck, you can blastheme the Holy Spirit and be _more_ redeemable than me.
I can just see Jessie Jackson slowly backing away from me after seeing that line.
👍: 0 ⏩: 3
OSWALD!
It's Oswald the Lucky Rabbit, not Oscar!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
No. Banned means that a governing body, either on a Federal or State level, has officially forbidden a film from being exhibited or distributed under penalty of fines or criminal proceedings.
Many theatre chains can also voluntarily refuse to show a film that the MPAA has not issued a rating for.
Religious or special interest groups like the NAAACP can BOYCOTT a movie, but that by no means forbids the general populace from seeing it.
Song of the South is NOT BANNED. The movie contains very politically-incorrect material and is thus not generally considered suitable for mass viewing in this day and age.
Disney are perfectly free, should they wish, to rerelease it as a special edition like the Disney Treasures DVDs. They may very well do this. The movie still deserves to be seen and recognised as a Disney historical piece and as long as it is accompanied by Leonard Maltin giving his usual careful commentary about its context, I think there's no harm in making it available. Disney does not deny that SotS existed, they just choose to respect that it contains material that is very offensive to a significant proportion of the population and are being careful.
And stop with the martyr complex, David. Noone cares.
And the word is 'blaspheme'.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Song of the South should stay in the vault. This is the 21st century, and there's no good reason whatsoever to dredge up what is, tbh, an embarrassing moment in animation by today's standards. It deserves to be in the same place as the anti-Japanese and anti-German propaganda of the 1940's -- an interesting footnote, a stark example of the racism and ethnocentrism of America in the early and mid 20th century, but nothing that should be celebrated. It's not a matter of fear of the NAACP or reverse racism or whatever.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'd say modify the story. The source of the movie, the actual stories of Uncle Remus, Br'er Rabbit, and company, is as much a part of American history as Dr. Martin Luther King. Also, the true purpose of the stories; a way for the Black Americans during and after their slave periods to cope and thrive in spite of their oppressions; can be translated to the modern day. "Don't throw me in the Briar Patch, Br'er Fox" still works, even when the person playing Br'er Rabbit is a white kid. I think you saw this example of Reverse Psychology in the original film. You can just as easily have Johnny tell a Crack dealer not to go to that Cop and tell him that Johnny cut through the lawn of the dealer's crack house.
That's why I go counter from the prevalent opinion to the remaking of Disney Films and say, remake this film. Set it in the 21st century, with a 21st century Uncle Remus, and a 21st century African American community. This change of time setting alone should take out 85-95% of the offensive part of the original Disney Movie right there.
That's the idea I had in my head when I put it in my site wiki.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0