unique said:

TonyVanDam said:

OFF-TOPIC: @unique.....If my research on the topic need some improvement, then fair enough.

But that last statement you made in your post where you accusing me for "talking shit a lot" is one of the biggest pieces of bullshit you ever said in this entire thread.

You don't know a damn thing about me anymore OR anyless that I know anything about you. But what I do know is you better knock it off with all of these fake charges you're placing on me.

A person who lacked one piece of information on a topic (whether it's about a Disney classic, or whatever) does NOT make that same person a liar. Unaware? Yes. Uneducated? Maybe. But a liar? NO!

And that is all I have to say on the matter.

@SunnySkies....My apologies to you for the inconvinence in your thread. But I needs to put Unique in check for his/her own good.

maybe english isn't your first language, in which case it's not a good idea to pick an argument on an english based website over semantics, but the whole thing started because i made an innocent reply to correct the factual error in your post, to which you tried to cover it up by posting some other crap instead

Is THAT^ a borderline racist statement you just said?

And just so you know, American English is my only language. I was born in the New Orleans, Louisiana, USA. But I wouldn't expect a closet racist like yourself to believe that.

Nonetheless, THIS arguement is so over now. You have really shown your true color to me. And you need to be ashamed of yourself.

unique said:

TonyVanDam said:

OFF-TOPIC: @unique.....If my research on the topic need some improvement, then fair enough.

But that last statement you made in your post where you accusing me for "talking shit a lot" is one of the biggest pieces of bullshit you ever said in this entire thread.

You don't know a damn thing about me anymore OR anyless that I know anything about you. But what I do know is you better knock it off with all of these fake charges you're placing on me.

A person who lacked one piece of information on a topic (whether it's about a Disney classic, or whatever) does NOT make that same person a liar. Unaware? Yes. Uneducated? Maybe. But a liar? NO!

And that is all I have to say on the matter.

@SunnySkies....My apologies to you for the inconvinence in your thread. But I needs to put Unique in check for his/her own good.

maybe english isn't your first language, in which case it's not a good idea to pick an argument on an english based website over semantics, but the whole thing started because i made an innocent reply to correct the factual error in your post, to which you tried to cover it up by posting some other crap instead

Is THAT^ a borderline racist statement you just said?

And just so you know, American English is my only language. I was born in the New Orleans, Louisiana, USA. But I wouldn't expect a closet racist like yourself to believe that.

Nonetheless, THIS arguement is so over now. You have really shown your true color to me. And you need to be ashamed of yourself.

Jestyr said:

unique said:

it's strange that you work for corporate legal rights and don't care. no it's not actually, is it. corportate= don't care

i have rips of both the uk pal vhs and the jap laserdisc with subs btw

Wikipedia. Right. You've just confirmed for all of us that you are a ridiculous fucking human being. Not worth it.

Not only THAT^, but Unique is a borderline closet racist as well. It's best for all orgers to not give in to his/her foolishness any further.

TonyVanDam said:

unique said:

maybe english isn't your first language, in which case it's not a good idea to pick an argument on an english based website over semantics, but the whole thing started because i made an innocent reply to correct the factual error in your post, to which you tried to cover it up by posting some other crap instead

Is THAT^ a borderline racist statement you just said?

And just so you know, American English is my only language. I was born in the New Orleans, Louisiana, USA. But I wouldn't expect a closet racist like yourself to believe that.

Nonetheless, THIS arguement is so over now. You have really shown your true color to me. And you need to be ashamed of yourself.

it's not fucking racist. i was giving you the benefit of the doubt seeing as none of what you are saying makes much sense and you can't understand what i'm saying. there are plenty of orgers to whom english isn't their first language. i would have expected someone who has english as a first language to understand what someone is saying and to make more sense when posting

btw, do you care the slightest about the topic as most of your posts are completely off topic. you've basically derailed this thread with all the shit you've posted. you haven't posted a single fact about the movie. i'm the only one to contribute anything worthwhile to this thread, and you dare call me a racist?

Stick to the topic folks

Take your personal beefs to orgnotes.

unique said:

morningsong said:

This movie gets talked about a lot on the org. Is this somekind of a class project the comes up like the mission projects? Or is this a fasination for people who live outside the us to seek this out?

there's usually a fascination with things you can't get (take the fascination of bootlegs for another example), this is also a bit of a cult movie, and perhaps due to the rerelease in 1973 and the age of most prince fans, it's quite likely that a large percentage of fans saw and loved this movie whilst a kid, and whilst other memorable movies have become easily available on home video, this hasn't, thus people haven't been able to relive those moments of childhood

on top of that, such as with a number of other cartoons from the earlier part of last centuary, some people have a fascination with the racist elements they can portray, and considering disney tries to keep a whiter than white (see what i did there?) profile, some people like to rub it in that they (surprise surprise) aren't the perfect corporation

for others the movie is interesting as one of the first to mix both live action and animation together, an early precurssor to the movies filled with cgi right now

I was just curious, since I have no memory of this movie except what I've seen on the org. I don't think it did very well here in the states, and was quickly forgotten about.

morningsong said:

unique said:

there's usually a fascination with things you can't get (take the fascination of bootlegs for another example), this is also a bit of a cult movie, and perhaps due to the rerelease in 1973 and the age of most prince fans, it's quite likely that a large percentage of fans saw and loved this movie whilst a kid, and whilst other memorable movies have become easily available on home video, this hasn't, thus people haven't been able to relive those moments of childhood

on top of that, such as with a number of other cartoons from the earlier part of last centuary, some people have a fascination with the racist elements they can portray, and considering disney tries to keep a whiter than white (see what i did there?) profile, some people like to rub it in that they (surprise surprise) aren't the perfect corporation

for others the movie is interesting as one of the first to mix both live action and animation together, an early precurssor to the movies filled with cgi right now

I was just curious, since I have no memory of this movie except what I've seen on the org. I don't think it did very well here in the states, and was quickly forgotten about.

the movie was a financial success. it's taken about $65m. it came out in 1946 which is why you maybe can't remember it, but it had a few reissues in the cinema, notably in 1973 which is probably why most orgers remember it from their youth, and the last cinematic release was in 1986, a couple of years after purple rain and another notable time when orgers may recall it

it was disneys first live action movie, and zip a dee doo day (zip a dee day) is a very well known classic tune

to many people, the early classic disney movies are embedded in their hearts, moreso now they ditched the classic animation and turned cgi and try too hard to include pop culture references to try and include an element of adult humour, twisting classic stories like rapunzel for example

TonyVanDam said:

The fear of Political Correctness is the main reason why Disney will NEVER release Song Of The South on DVD. The tar baby segment is the only issue. But other than that, the whole film is classic.

Interesting that you say this, Tony. I just read a recent article that mirrors EXACTLY what you just said about my fave disney movie.

On November 30, 2010, Disney released their highly praised and greatly worshiped film Fantasia in a spectacular 4 disc set. Over the years, if you have visited the actual Disneyland theme park, you will, without a doubt ,notice the evening show spectacle that is a live rendition of the film, performed on the water.

In 1940 Walt Disney produced this, his third film, and decided to distribute the work himself. The film was initially two hours and 20 minutes long, featuring animation, coupled with classical music, to dazzle, both in a beautiful sync. RKO came in to re-edit, and made it more suitable for broader audiences, as the film nearly broke the bank of the Mickey Mouse company. Since then, the film has been re-cut nearly a dozen times.

The previous release of Beauty and the Beast was a remarkable set, going for a more well rounded cultural acceptance with Peabo Bryson and Jordan Sparksin two different music videos on the discs; this on the coattails of the release of their first black princess, Tiana in The Frog Princess. I’m in no way suggesting that this is some master plan to soften the blow of the release ofFantasia, and the controversial nature of one scene in that film.

The Pastoral Symphony, a ten minute segment, first caught attention for it’s shocking slight nudity (at the time) of the centaurs (gasp). Later on it caught hell for it’s depiction of the other centaurs; the half human half/horse people with beautiful straight lavish blonde hairs and lovely bushy tails, who frolic in the bush and dance about the water; to the picaninny type Afro-centaurs, who appear to be half man/half DONKEY, with a stiff tail that mirrors their coarse hair. The hair on top of their heads sticks out and is hardened with yellow ribbons. Their lips are beyond full, large and plump. Ears bear large golden hoops that jiggle with each movement. These servant centaurs have large beaming smiles, ecstatic to please their master centaurs. Then there are the more accepted Zebra-Centaurs, half human/half zebra, called later the Nubian centaurs, whose pigment is obviously a lighter tone, with more “gentle” hair. Their size in stature is the same as the other gorgeous white centaurs but not the same, as they are servants to a portly King, whom they constantly fan under a shade.

FULL SEGMENT: http://www.youtube.com/wa...PKpFNm3QMM

Offensive a bit, yes; but to censor it? Don’t really understand or see the reason Disney felt the need to cut, edit or splice the fifteen seconds of the slave centaurs out. Not only is this the work of an artist in their expression, but it is also history. To alter a piece of art, to censor the artist, to defuse it’s very nature and merely store away in a vault to never be seen again, does not cover up the racist implications. The racial act has already been attempted. I find it odd and awkward for artist in film to apologize for something that was included in their work, IE: Michael Bay for his Steppin Fetchit Robots in Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. Doesn’t make sense to apologize for something you clearly went so far out of your way to bring to light. Not only in the written format, pre-production, shooting/filming, editing, screening and passing through to the okay stage for all to see. Same should follow suit for Fantasia, as animation takes years upon years to draw and redraw, color and finalize. So for Disney to leave out what they felt was so important enough to show to an exclusive few in 1940, they should be able to show all. Where does the censorship stop? Will Disney change the voices of the Crowsin DUMBO? Will they change the song “Will I See An Elephant Fly?”

Erasism. A decade or two ago there were several t-shirts that many dressed in, with this logo. I think the idea of the matter was to rid or do away with racism and not to erase all instances of racism history. If we deleted, photoshopped, or airbrushed all works of our past to create a more gentle future, it negates what some many have fought and died for. A history lesson that won’t match up when the students come acrossMedgar Evers and Emmett Till. These works are clearly a sign of the times and should be seen as just that. Without these images and motion pictures there would be no progression. Spike Lee, Julie Dash among others, were featured onAMC’s Movies That Shocked The World: Birth of a Nation. Many critics and black film-makers discussed what went into making the film, its grueling display, but overall the importance that it had on film as a whole.

Racism is a bit stronger than the stroke of a brush, and no matter how you fine tune your piece, no splice can cut the hate out of the work. No matter how hard Mickey Mouse may try with the accompaniment of music with magic, the self moving mops can not sweep up the blood that has laid the foundation of history. Sad note, as Texas, in the past year has decided to lift and fudge information in actual historical text books to teach to children.

Spike Lee’s Bamboozled worked as showcase of what was the current state of television; many youth/younger children had no idea what on earth a minstrel show was until that film.

^ good article

fantasia is one of my fave disney movies

and birth of a nation is really hard going, 3 hours of black and white academy ratio silent movie, and the first movie to have a sequel, the fall of the nation. the movie was originally called "the clansmen", which makes more sense if you've seen it

unique said:

^ good article

fantasia is one of my fave disney movies

and birth of a nation is really hard going, 3 hours of black and white academy ratio silent movie, and the first movie to have a sequel, the fall of the nation. the movie was originally called "the clansmen", which makes more sense if you've seen it

One of the most unusual thing about the making of that movie(to me) is the lifelong friendship between Madame Sul-Te-Wan & D. W. Griffith. Thats def an odd combination.

[Edited 1/9/11 14:02pm]

Harlepolis said:

unique said:

^ good article

fantasia is one of my fave disney movies

and birth of a nation is really hard going, 3 hours of black and white academy ratio silent movie, and the first movie to have a sequel, the fall of the nation. the movie was originally called "the clansmen", which makes more sense if you've seen it

One of the most unusual thing about the making of that movie(to me) is the lifelong friendship between Madame Sul-Te-Wan & D. W. Griffith. Thats def an odd combination.

[Edited 1/9/11 14:02pm]

why is that?

Harlepolis said:

TonyVanDam said:

The fear of Political Correctness is the main reason why Disney will NEVER release Song Of The South on DVD. The tar baby segment is the only issue. But other than that, the whole film is classic.

Interesting that you say this, Tony. I just read a recent article that mirrors EXACTLY what you just said about my fave disney movie.

Disney Deletes Racism

By Tony, on December 13th, 2010

On November 30, 2010, Disney released their highly praised and greatly worshiped film Fantasia in a spectacular 4 disc set. Over the years, if you have visited the actual Disneyland theme park, you will, without a doubt ,notice the evening show spectacle that is a live rendition of the film, performed on the water.

In 1940 Walt Disney produced this, his third film, and decided to distribute the work himself. The film was initially two hours and 20 minutes long, featuring animation, coupled with classical music, to dazzle, both in a beautiful sync. RKO came in to re-edit, and made it more suitable for broader audiences, as the film nearly broke the bank of the Mickey Mouse company. Since then, the film has been re-cut nearly a dozen times.

The previous release of Beauty and the Beast was a remarkable set, going for a more well rounded cultural acceptance with Peabo Bryson and Jordan Sparksin two different music videos on the discs; this on the coattails of the release of their first black princess, Tiana in The Frog Princess. I’m in no way suggesting that this is some master plan to soften the blow of the release ofFantasia, and the controversial nature of one scene in that film.

The Pastoral Symphony, a ten minute segment, first caught attention for it’s shocking slight nudity (at the time) of the centaurs (gasp). Later on it caught hell for it’s depiction of the other centaurs; the half human half/horse people with beautiful straight lavish blonde hairs and lovely bushy tails, who frolic in the bush and dance about the water; to the picaninny type Afro-centaurs, who appear to be half man/half DONKEY, with a stiff tail that mirrors their coarse hair. The hair on top of their heads sticks out and is hardened with yellow ribbons. Their lips are beyond full, large and plump. Ears bear large golden hoops that jiggle with each movement. These servant centaurs have large beaming smiles, ecstatic to please their master centaurs. Then there are the more accepted Zebra-Centaurs, half human/half zebra, called later the Nubian centaurs, whose pigment is obviously a lighter tone, with more “gentle” hair. Their size in stature is the same as the other gorgeous white centaurs but not the same, as they are servants to a portly King, whom they constantly fan under a shade.

FULL SEGMENT: http://www.youtube.com/wa...PKpFNm3QMM

Offensive a bit, yes; but to censor it? Don’t really understand or see the reason Disney felt the need to cut, edit or splice the fifteen seconds of the slave centaurs out. Not only is this the work of an artist in their expression, but it is also history. To alter a piece of art, to censor the artist, to defuse it’s very nature and merely store away in a vault to never be seen again, does not cover up the racist implications. The racial act has already been attempted. I find it odd and awkward for artist in film to apologize for something that was included in their work, IE: Michael Bay for his Steppin Fetchit Robots in Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. Doesn’t make sense to apologize for something you clearly went so far out of your way to bring to light. Not only in the written format, pre-production, shooting/filming, editing, screening and passing through to the okay stage for all to see. Same should follow suit for Fantasia, as animation takes years upon years to draw and redraw, color and finalize. So for Disney to leave out what they felt was so important enough to show to an exclusive few in 1940, they should be able to show all. Where does the censorship stop? Will Disney change the voices of the Crowsin DUMBO? Will they change the song “Will I See An Elephant Fly?”

Erasism. A decade or two ago there were several t-shirts that many dressed in, with this logo. I think the idea of the matter was to rid or do away with racism and not to erase all instances of racism history. If we deleted, photoshopped, or airbrushed all works of our past to create a more gentle future, it negates what some many have fought and died for. A history lesson that won’t match up when the students come acrossMedgar Evers and Emmett Till. These works are clearly a sign of the times and should be seen as just that. Without these images and motion pictures there would be no progression. Spike Lee, Julie Dash among others, were featured onAMC’s Movies That Shocked The World: Birth of a Nation. Many critics and black film-makers discussed what went into making the film, its grueling display, but overall the importance that it had on film as a whole.

Racism is a bit stronger than the stroke of a brush, and no matter how you fine tune your piece, no splice can cut the hate out of the work. No matter how hard Mickey Mouse may try with the accompaniment of music with magic, the self moving mops can not sweep up the blood that has laid the foundation of history. Sad note, as Texas, in the past year has decided to lift and fudge information in actual historical text books to teach to children.

Spike Lee’s Bamboozled worked as showcase of what was the current state of television; many youth/younger children had no idea what on earth a minstrel show was until that film.

Good essay. But I can NOT help but to remember what Mr. Paul Mooney said about Disney classics.

unique said:

Harlepolis said:

One of the most unusual thing about the making of that movie(to me) is the lifelong friendship between Madame Sul-Te-Wan & D. W. Griffith. Thats def an odd combination.

[Edited 1/9/11 14:02pm]

why is that?

A man who helped to make this mean spirited "epic" movie which dehumanized a whole race of people while befriending a woman from the same people he showed nothing but contempt against.

Doesn't really add up to me.

Harlepolis said:

unique said:

why is that?

A man who helped to make this mean spirited "epic" movie which dehumanized a whole race of people while befriending a woman from the same people he showed nothing but contempt against.

Doesn't really add up to me.

The same thing can be said about the friendship of Mel Gibson & Whoopi Goldberg.

Harlepolis said:

unique said:

^ good article

fantasia is one of my fave disney movies

and birth of a nation is really hard going, 3 hours of black and white academy ratio silent movie, and the first movie to have a sequel, the fall of the nation. the movie was originally called "the clansmen", which makes more sense if you've seen it

One of the most unusual thing about the making of that movie(to me) is the lifelong friendship between Madame Sul-Te-Wan & D. W. Griffith. Thats def an odd combination.

[Edited 1/9/11 14:02pm]

It'd be interesting to know what the actress and Griffith got out of the relationship -- perhaps particularly whether it was one primarily of ready job availability/go-to exploitatee for the parties.

Lammastide said:

Harlepolis said:

One of the most unusual thing about the making of that movie(to me) is the lifelong friendship between Madame Sul-Te-Wan & D. W. Griffith. Thats def an odd combination.

[Edited 1/9/11 14:02pm]

It'd be interesting to know what the actress and Griffith got out of the relationship -- perhaps particularly whether it was one primarily of ready job availability/go-to exploitatee for the parties.

Maybe so, but from the depiction of their friendship according to this book. I think it was deeper than just interior motives.

[img:$uid]http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51fzSFfiSmL._SL500_.jpg[/img:$uid]

unique said:

morningsong said:

I was just curious, since I have no memory of this movie except what I've seen on the org. I don't think it did very well here in the states, and was quickly forgotten about.

the movie was a financial success. it's taken about $65m. it came out in 1946 which is why you maybe can't remember it, but it had a few reissues in the cinema, notably in 1973 which is probably why most orgers remember it from their youth, and the last cinematic release was in 1986, a couple of years after purple rain and another notable time when orgers may recall it

it was disneys first live action movie, and zip a dee doo day (zip a dee day) is a very well known classic tune

to many people, the early classic disney movies are embedded in their hearts, moreso now they ditched the classic animation and turned cgi and try too hard to include pop culture references to try and include an element of adult humour, twisting classic stories like rapunzel for example

Must be one of those things. I don't remember it, even after looking at it on youtube, even the tempo the zip a dee day song seems off and unfamiliar.

This was a weekly staple in our house so Disney was never forbidden.

Just a curious thing.

[Edited 1/9/11 14:59pm]

TonyVanDam said:

Harlepolis said:

A man who helped to make this mean spirited "epic" movie which dehumanized a whole race of people while befriending a woman from the same people he showed nothing but contempt against.

Doesn't really add up to me.

The same thing can be said about the friendship of Mel Gibson & Whoopi Goldberg.

Oh really? Did Mel Gibson make a film solely on the basis of condemning a WHOLE race of people, and gave birth to many of the "media stereotypes" regarding their image? Griffith showed his disdain against black people like a badge of honor and he flaunted it in his work,,,,unlike Mel & the cowardly hollywood clique. Thats what makes it odd to me.

Harlepolis said:

unique said:

why is that?

A man who helped to make this mean spirited "epic" movie which dehumanized a whole race of people while befriending a woman from the same people he showed nothing but contempt against.

Doesn't really add up to me.

but he was just making a movie and trying to tell a story. he addressed his critics with his next film, intolerance (loves stuggle through the ages) which cost a fortune to make and was a financial flop

you wouldn't say the creators of roots dehumanised people, they were just telling a story of what happened. sometimes showing the evils of what happen it can make people think twice and stop them doing it. such as a serbian movie for example

morningsong said:

unique said:

the movie was a financial success. it's taken about $65m. it came out in 1946 which is why you maybe can't remember it, but it had a few reissues in the cinema, notably in 1973 which is probably why most orgers remember it from their youth, and the last cinematic release was in 1986, a couple of years after purple rain and another notable time when orgers may recall it

it was disneys first live action movie, and zip a dee doo day (zip a dee day) is a very well known classic tune

to many people, the early classic disney movies are embedded in their hearts, moreso now they ditched the classic animation and turned cgi and try too hard to include pop culture references to try and include an element of adult humour, twisting classic stories like rapunzel for example

Must be one of those things. I don't remember it, even after looking at it on youtube, even the tempo the zip a dee day song seems off and unfamiliar.

http://www.youtube.com/wa...tw1buV1GHY

This was a weekly staple in our house so Disney was never forbidden.

Just a curious thing.

you aren't familiar with zip a dee doo dah? is your surname fritzl?

i suppose it depends on how old you are, in the 70s and maybe early 80s it was pretty famliar. even glee referenced the movie at the end of last season. you know you've made it when glee reference you

unique said:

Harlepolis said:

A man who helped to make this mean spirited "epic" movie which dehumanized a whole race of people while befriending a woman from the same people he showed nothing but contempt against.

Doesn't really add up to me.

but he was just making a movie and trying to tell a story. he addressed his critics with his next film, intolerance (loves stuggle through the ages) which cost a fortune to make and was a financial flop

you wouldn't say the creators of roots dehumanised people, they were just telling a story of what happened. sometimes showing the evils of what happen it can make people think twice and stop them doing it. such as a serbian movie for example

Birth Of A Nation was fiction(and a one dimensional story at that) . Roots was NON fiction. Therein lies the difference.

Harlepolis said:

unique said:

but he was just making a movie and trying to tell a story. he addressed his critics with his next film, intolerance (loves stuggle through the ages) which cost a fortune to make and was a financial flop

you wouldn't say the creators of roots dehumanised people, they were just telling a story of what happened. sometimes showing the evils of what happen it can make people think twice and stop them doing it. such as a serbian movie for example

Birth Of A Nation was fiction(and a one dimensional story at that) . Roots was NON fiction. Therein lies the difference.

both were fiction and based on historic events. roots was fiction, chicken george etc didn't exist in real life, they just created characters to tell the story of early america over two seasons

unique said:

morningsong said:

Must be one of those things. I don't remember it, even after looking at it on youtube, even the tempo the zip a dee day song seems off and unfamiliar.

http://www.youtube.com/wa...tw1buV1GHY

This was a weekly staple in our house so Disney was never forbidden.

Just a curious thing.

you aren't familiar with zip a dee doo dah? is your surname fritzl?

i suppose it depends on how old you are, in the 70s and maybe early 80s it was pretty famliar. even glee referenced the movie at the end of last season. you know you've made it when glee reference you

I am familiar with it just not that version, there are several versions if you saw the youtube link, which is dated back to 1962, I posted you'd hear a snippet of the instrumental version that I heard every week growing up, as I said the tempo in 'songs of the south' seem odd and unfamiliar to me.

But I can see there was a lot of Disney stuff I was never introduced to as a child, the adults in my life were slick, I never suspected a thing.

morningsong said:

unique said:

you aren't familiar with zip a dee doo dah? is your surname fritzl?

i suppose it depends on how old you are, in the 70s and maybe early 80s it was pretty famliar. even glee referenced the movie at the end of last season. you know you've made it when glee reference you

I am familiar with it just not that version, there are several versions if you saw the youtube link, which is dated back to 1962, I posted you'd hear a snippet of the instrumental version that I heard every week growing up, as I said the tempo in 'songs of the south' seem odd and unfamiliar to me.

But I can see there was a lot of Disney stuff I was never introduced to as a child, the adults in my life were slick, I never suspected a thing.

at the end of the clip the instrumental is pretty familiar of the tune, they've not turned it into a jazz funk oddysey or something

i'd say the tune is as famous as bear necessities from jungle book, it's a well known classic, even if most people don't have a clue where it's from. you could say the same from a lot of showtunes though

Harlepolis said:

Lammastide said:

It'd be interesting to know what the actress and Griffith got out of the relationship -- perhaps particularly whether it was one primarily of ready job availability/go-to exploitatee for the parties.

Maybe so, but from the depiction of their friendship according to this book. I think it was deeper than just interior motives.

[img:$uid]http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51fzSFfiSmL._SL500_.jpg[/img:$uid]

That looks like a great read.

Lammastide said:

Harlepolis said:

Maybe so, but from the depiction of their friendship according to this book. I think it was deeper than just interior motives.

[img:$uid]http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51fzSFfiSmL._SL500_.jpg[/img:$uid]

That looks like a great read.

It is

Donald Bogle is the ultimate historian when it comes to black hollywood during the segregation era IMO. And his research wasn't dragged with loom & gloom either(contrary to the popular image), those people lived fascinating lives. I esp loved the segments about the famous black club owners of that period.

Harlepolis said:

TonyVanDam said:

The same thing can be said about the friendship of Mel Gibson & Whoopi Goldberg.

Oh really? Did Mel Gibson make a film solely on the basis of condemning a WHOLE race of people, and gave birth to many of the "media stereotypes" regarding their image? Griffith showed his disdain against black people like a badge of honor and he flaunted it in his work,,,,unlike Mel & the cowardly hollywood clique. Thats what makes it odd to me.

D.W. Griffith was a racist douchbag of a film maker, without question.

But do you know what I found the most tragic of all? The fact that there were millions of very uneducated (white) people in America that actually believe everything that was in the film Birth Of A Nation.

unique said:

Harlepolis said:

Birth Of A Nation was fiction(and a one dimensional story at that) . Roots was NON fiction. Therein lies the difference.

both were fiction and based on historic events. roots was fiction, chicken george etc didn't exist in real life, they just created characters to tell the story of early america over two seasons

Chicken George didn't exist but the primary history of Alex Haley's life was accurately depicted. Slavery was not fiction. But, since you mentioned "Roots", while there were evil white characters portrayed, there were positive ones portrayed as well.

The "Black=Savages/rapists/villains Vs Whites=Noble fighters/heros" theme going on "Birth Of A Nation" was fiction and a simple minded fantasy.

Anyway, it was a stretch of a comparison to begin with. Hollywood have a long history of stigmatizing the image of black people in their films(even to this day), white people on the other hand have a balanced image.

[Edited 1/9/11 16:28pm]

Harlepolis said:

unique said:

both were fiction and based on historic events. roots was fiction, chicken george etc didn't exist in real life, they just created characters to tell the story of early america over two seasons

Chicken George didn't exist but the primary history of Alex Haley's life was accurately depicted. Slavery was not fiction. But, since you mentioned "Roots", while there were evil white characters portrayed, there were positive ones portrayed as well.

The "Black=Savages/rapists/villains Vs Whites=Noble fighters/heros" theme going on "Birth Of A Nation" was fiction and a simple minded fantasy.

Anyway, it was a stretch of a comparison to begin with. Hollywood have a long history of stigmatizing the image of black people in their films(even to this day), white people on the other hand have a balanced image.

[Edited 1/9/11 16:28pm]

Not to mention the fact that any liberties Haley took overwhelmingly regarded the oral tradition of his own family. Griffith's work (like its source material), on the other hand, employed a wholesale revisionism of important parts of national history, including an idyllic picture of American slavery and segregation; the noble motive, formation, tactics, scale and licitness of Klan action; the takeover of Congress by drunken, monkeylike freed slaves; the traiterous insurgence of a Black militia; the systematic turning away of White voters; the legal approval -- and oppressive enforcement -- of marital miscegenation, ad infinitum. And if all this isn't enough, in the film's denouement, we also see an endorsement, not only in narrative, but full-on text, of the self-same Aryan myth the Nazis would come to pander AND a culminating juxtaposition of this all with prophetic visions of a coming terrestrial Ario-Christian paradise!

So, um, yeah... somehow I'm thinking Roots is a teeny tiny bit different.

[Edited 1/9/11 17:24pm]