Gone With The Wind Temporally Removed From HBO MAX (Or How To Look Back On Controversial Media) (2 Viewers)

Saint Jack

Super Forum Fanatic
VIP Contributor
Joined
May 11, 2010
Messages
10,775
Reaction score
18,356
Location
Marrero
Offline
Sticky Post

Before anyone says it’s oversensitivity, the full movie will return unedited. It’ll just include a discussion about the stereotypes and probably a warning.

WB did something similar when they released the Looney Tunes to DVD unedited.
 

tenordas

Vesti le procè flamber
VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 31, 1997
Messages
11,084
Reaction score
5,645
Location
Houston via New Jersey, New Orleans, Baton Rouge,
Online
I never saw it. I have not seen Citizen Kane either, but I did see Kane when he was on wrastlin.
Did you guys know Kane is now the mayor of Knoxville Tenn?
You're not missing anything. I always hated this film. The main character is a completely unlikable spoiled rich scum; somehow, we're supposed to care what happens to her. It's a complete waste of celluloid. They can drop it off the face of the earth for all I care. It's a stupid movie.

Citizen Kane is something you should see, however. Not just for the skewering of Hearst, but because Welles' performance is masterful.
 

DaveXA

I love the Lord!
Staff member
Super Moderator
Joined
Sep 6, 2001
Messages
35,015
Reaction score
22,965
Age
50
Location
Vienna, VA via Lafayette
Offline
I think you’re putting the cart before the horse
The movies/art that you are talking about ARE the sanitized or propaganda) versions - presumably, they hinder our moving forward bc they make disgusting actions/behaviors palatable

Hamilton deliberately takes great liscense with the past - it’s done in these post- modern times, so it has artistic precedent
But say it’s 100 years from now and we are several cycles away from post-modernism — maybe the culture is so diffuse and varied that arts years for historical accuracy- I could see Hamilton coming under fire for its retelling of history
What I think I'm trying to get at is leaving those sanitized versions of history to remind people that they are exactly that. In other words, how do we know what's sanitized if we aren't able to observe and identify it? I mean, it's sort of like trying to explain to a flat earther without showing him a globe, or showing a round earther an old flat earth map and why it was wrong.

Sort of like the old maps of the early days where everything was pretty distorted because of our limited perception of the earth at the time. And, I don’t know, Gone with the wind was a fictional account of one's limited views of what the South was in that time period. Not really accurate, and in a similar way to Hamilton being a historically incorrect portrayal.
 

tenordas

Vesti le procè flamber
VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 31, 1997
Messages
11,084
Reaction score
5,645
Location
Houston via New Jersey, New Orleans, Baton Rouge,
Online
Disney fans are urging the theme park operator to rethink Splash Mountain, a log flume ride based on a nearly 75-year-old movie that has long been criticized for racist themes.

The company has been distancing itself from its controversial 1946 film “Song of the South” for decades now. The movie, set on a plantation after the Civil War, is not included on the new streaming service Disney Plus. And former Walt Disney CEO Bob Iger, now executive chairman, says it won’t ever be.

“I’ve felt as long as I’ve been CEO that ‘Song of the South’ — even with a disclaimer — was just not appropriate in today’s world,” Iger said in March during a shareholder meeting. “It’s just hard, given the depictions in some of those films, to bring them out today without in some form or another offending people, so we’ve decided not to do that.”

Given that, advocates of the change say it’s time the film’s fingerprints be wiped from the company’s theme parks as well. The ride can be found at the Florida, California and Tokyo resorts. Disney plans to reopen its domestic parks next month after closing them because of the coronavirus pandemic.

The push to give the ride a new theme has gained traction on social media and in Change.org petitions in the past week amid a broader national conversation — and massive protests — around racism and injustice sparked by the death of George Floyd. Four former Minneapolis police officers have been charged in connection with his death...........

They're already in process of doing it. They're removing B'rer Rabbit, et al, and replacing those characters with the ones from "The Princess and the Frog".

 
Last edited:

guidomerkinsrules

W H A T E V I R
VIP Contributor
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
62,341
Reaction score
103,238
Location
by the cemeteries
Offline
What I think I'm trying to get at is leaving those sanitized versions of history to remind people that they are exactly that. In other words, how do we know what's sanitized if we aren't able to observe and identify it? I mean, it's sort of like trying to explain to a flat earther without showing him a globe, or showing a round earther an old flat earth map and why it was wrong.

Sort of like the old maps of the early days where everything was pretty distorted because of our limited perception of the earth at the time. And, I don’t know, Gone with the wind was a fictional account of one's limited views of what the South was in that time period. Not really accurate, and in a similar way to Hamilton being a historically incorrect portrayal.
Let’s also be clear that GWTW has not been removed and is available
Outside of Song of the South, there aren’t that many shoes that have been removed entirely
- pretty sure you can still see Burth of a Nation if you have such an inclination

I will argue that GWTW is as much propaganda as art
And most John Wayne movies and their ilk are more propaganda than art
 

DaveXA

I love the Lord!
Staff member
Super Moderator
Joined
Sep 6, 2001
Messages
35,015
Reaction score
22,965
Age
50
Location
Vienna, VA via Lafayette
Offline
Let’s also be clear that GWTW has not been removed and is available
Outside of Song of the South, there aren’t that many shoes that have been removed entirely
- pretty sure you can still see Burth of a Nation if you have such an inclination

I will argue that GWTW is as much propaganda as art
And most John Wayne movies and their ilk are more propaganda than art
That makes sense. I was thinking of the shows that removed episodes with blackface and such. And more of whether GWTW should be banned entirely or just left on the dust heap where people can just view it in their own homes or whatever. I've never been a fan of the movie.

My thinking is less about a specific show and more about what parts of art, history and/or even propaganda should be preserved and taught so that we don't repeat past mistakes and lessons learned remain as such.
 

Waymer

Waymer
Super Moderator
VIP Subscribing Member
Gold VIP Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 1997
Messages
11,909
Reaction score
3,137
Offline
Here's a deeper question on "cancel culture" that recently popped up in our office conversations.

Can you (and should you, or would you, or do you) separate the art from the artist?

Examples:

1. Let's say your favorite artist is Mike Phone, and Mike one day is arrested and convicted on, say, domestic violence. Or rape. Or murder. Or whatever the "breaking point" is for you in terms of crime/sin. Should you stop listening to Mike's past music that you love, and that maybe even "helps" your own happiness?

2. What if your favorite team signs a player that did something you find awful. Let's say, for this case, Derrius Guice is convicted of what he was just charged with, but is available in 2 years, the Saints sign him, and he goes on to have a 1,000 yard season. Do you cheer when Guice scores, because the Saints come first? Do you boycott the Saints? Do you groan at the uncomfort you find?

3. Or if your favorite restaurant owner has been harassing women or people of color. Do you boycott his restaurant(s), or can you enjoy his food/menu?

4. Can someone still watch The Cosby Show with a new generation of kids because it is wholesome TV content, even knowing the main person has been charged with heinous crimes?

Now, to be clear, the actions above are just examples. The "criminal or moral act" can be whatever disgusts you. I just provided headline type examples.

This is a complicated situation of course. Boycotting a famous restaurant owner doesn't necessarily hurt him the most. He's theoretically well set up from cookbook sales, TV money, savings, etc. But if suddenly no one comes to the restaurant, how does that impact the line cook? The dishwasher? The host/hostess? They may ultimately suffer more than the owner ever would.

Likewise, an NFL team is a moving machine of 53 main roster players, 10 practice squad players, 20 IR guys, a dozen coaches, operations staff, etc. Does you giving up your NFL tickets to make a point impact our fictional Derrius Guice scenario, or does it just impact your enjoyment of life, etc?

Is it easier to support a team still over an individual such as a solo singer, golfer, tennis player, etc? But even then managers, backup singers, bandmates, etc are impacted.

So is there a "right" answer? A "right" balance? Is there a way to "punish" someone in the examples above?
 

guidomerkinsrules

W H A T E V I R
VIP Contributor
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
62,341
Reaction score
103,238
Location
by the cemeteries
Offline
Here's a deeper question on "cancel culture" that recently popped up in our office conversations.

Can you (and should you, or would you, or do you) separate the art from the artist?

Examples:

1. Let's say your favorite artist is Mike Phone, and Mike one day is arrested and convicted on, say, domestic violence. Or rape. Or murder. Or whatever the "breaking point" is for you in terms of crime/sin. Should you stop listening to Mike's past music that you love, and that maybe even "helps" your own happiness?

2. What if your favorite team signs a player that did something you find awful. Let's say, for this case, Derrius Guice is convicted of what he was just charged with, but is available in 2 years, the Saints sign him, and he goes on to have a 1,000 yard season. Do you cheer when Guice scores, because the Saints come first? Do you boycott the Saints? Do you groan at the uncomfort you find?

3. Or if your favorite restaurant owner has been harassing women or people of color. Do you boycott his restaurant(s), or can you enjoy his food/menu?

4. Can someone still watch The Cosby Show with a new generation of kids because it is wholesome TV content, even knowing the main person has been charged with heinous crimes?

Now, to be clear, the actions above are just examples. The "criminal or moral act" can be whatever disgusts you. I just provided headline type examples.

This is a complicated situation of course. Boycotting a famous restaurant owner doesn't necessarily hurt him the most. He's theoretically well set up from cookbook sales, TV money, savings, etc. But if suddenly no one comes to the restaurant, how does that impact the line cook? The dishwasher? The host/hostess? They may ultimately suffer more than the owner ever would.

Likewise, an NFL team is a moving machine of 53 main roster players, 10 practice squad players, 20 IR guys, a dozen coaches, operations staff, etc. Does you giving up your NFL tickets to make a point impact our fictional Derrius Guice scenario, or does it just impact your enjoyment of life, etc?

Is it easier to support a team still over an individual such as a solo singer, golfer, tennis player, etc? But even then managers, backup singers, bandmates, etc are impacted.

So is there a "right" answer? A "right" balance? Is there a way to "punish" someone in the examples above?
Woody Allen used to be my favorite director by a healthy margin
I have not watched a Woody Allen movie since ‘the triubles’

I won’t watch a Mel Gibson movie bc he seems like a truly heinous person

I don’t have enough spending power for my dining choices to matter
 
Joined
Aug 10, 2018
Messages
1,946
Reaction score
4,295
Location
The Vieux
Online
Most of us listen to music from some pretty heinous people - Bowie, Mick, Page, Elvis, etc... For some reason, rock stars get a pass that other types of media don't.
 

Waymer

Waymer
Super Moderator
VIP Subscribing Member
Gold VIP Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 1997
Messages
11,909
Reaction score
3,137
Offline
Woody Allen used to be my favorite director by a healthy margin
I have not watched a Woody Allen movie since ‘the triubles’

I won’t watch a Mel Gibson movie bc he seems like a truly heinous person

I don’t have enough spending power for my dining choices to matter
In the grand scheme none of us matter. But should we even care? And is it enough to just care? Or do our actions matter? If we were all trying to explain things to our young teenagers, what is the “right” answer?
 

guidomerkinsrules

W H A T E V I R
VIP Contributor
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
62,341
Reaction score
103,238
Location
by the cemeteries
Offline
In the grand scheme none of us matter. But should we even care? And is it enough to just care? Or do our actions matter? If we were all trying to explain things to our young teenagers, what is the “right” answer?
Well obviously I know woody Allen or Mel Gibson are aware of my (in)actions, so it’s something I do for/to myself

I came if age in a performing arts world where the old school abusive teachers/artists were finally being called to task
What you taught/created was soon evaluated with how you taught/created it
Is any dance worth being abused into an eating disorder?
Is any play/movie with sexual assault?
Probably not
 

gavinj

Super Forum Fanatic
Joined
Apr 12, 2004
Messages
11,426
Reaction score
10,448
Online
Most of us listen to music from some pretty heinous people - Bowie, Mick, Page, Elvis, etc... For some reason, rock stars get a pass that other types of media don't.
Painters, sculptors, writers, composers pretty much all get a pass if their art is great.
 

Saintman2884

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Dec 17, 2003
Messages
14,624
Reaction score
2,411
Online
And you dont seem to see the inherent contradictions if not borderline hypocrisy in this, gavin. I mean, most of us admire or revere John Lennon as a legendary musician, artist, fervent activist for peace and disarmament in his lifetime but the mainstream media, especially the rock press, (Rolling Stone, that means you), seem to ignore the facts that he was selfish, self-centered, egotistical, at times chauvinistic butt crevasse who treated his first son, Julian like crap while his second son, Sean, was lavished upon like royalty. Even his own two sons, have admitted their father's failings. Sean Lennon even admitted his father was a egotistical, self-centered pig in an interview back in the late 90s. Lennon was once arrested in L.A. during his "Lost Weekend" phase in 1973 for drunk and disorderly conduct.

But even with those character flaws, Lennon's behavior and actions make him a choir boy compared to fellow rock stars, writers and later on like Mick Jagger, Ezra Pound(who made infamous, vehement antisemitic propaganda radio speeches during WWII), Michael Jackson(let's include him, too), Vince Neil of Motley Crue( who was so drunk one night in 1983 he went driving to get more booze on Sunset Strip he got into a nasty wreck and killed Hanoi Rocks guitarist) Neil got off easy compared to 95% rest of the population, no 10-20 year prison sentence at San Quentin for him. Oh and BTW, that incident irrevocably soured the relationship in band between Neil and Nikki Sixx or Tommy Lee--they never really forgave him for that. H.G. Wells was accused of plagiarism by Conrad for basing his novel Island of Dr. Moreau off Conrad's Heart of Darkness.
 

Mr. Sparkle

Disrespectful to dirt
Joined
Mar 5, 2002
Messages
12,384
Reaction score
11,177
Offline

Devildog

Combobulated
Joined
Feb 26, 2004
Messages
17,276
Reaction score
19,754
Location
:hookthem:
Offline
The dang movie was written by Richard Pryor. I always thought it was to show how racists look like bumbling idiots.
 

Optimus Prime

Subscribing Member
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Joined
Jul 18, 1998
Messages
8,218
Reaction score
8,891
Offline
A couple episodes of the Muppet Show not on Disney+, other episodes have a disclaimer

This isn't new for them, Disney has done this for at least 15 years with the disclaimers on some of the cartoons on the Walt Disney Treasures DVD sets

There's not a disclaimer out there that will allow the Song of the South to see the light of day again
==================================
Jim Henson’s classic series “The Muppet Show” began streaming on Disney+ on Friday, but now comes prefaced with an offensive content disclaimer.

“This program includes negative depictions and/or mistreatment of people or cultures,” the warning reads. “These stereotypes were wrong then and are wrong now. Rather than remove this content, we want to acknowledge its harmful impact, learn from it and spark conversations to create a more inclusive future together.”

The show, which ran for five seasons between 1976 and 1981, features the new content warning on 18 episodes, including those guest-hosted by Steve Martin, Peter Sellers, Kenny Rogers, Johnny Cash, Debbie Harry and Marty Feldman, among others.

Each episode bears the 12-second disclaimer for a different reason, from Cash’s appearance singing in front of a Confederate flag to negative depictions of Native Americans, Middle Easterners and people from other cultures. Additionally, two episodes from the final season, featuring guest stars Brooke Shields and staff writer Chris Langham, are left out entirely...................

'Muppet Show' now has content disclaimer warning on Disney+ - Los Angeles Times (latimes.com)
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 2)



New Orleans Saints Twitter Feed

Headlines

Top Bottom