Theater Stops Showing ‘Gone With the Wind,’ Ran For Decades-Now Deemed ‘insensitive’

originally posted by: Wide-Eyes
a reply to: DrStevenBrule

Wrong, they would need white actors to play slaves.

That would be a box office smasher.

No leftists would cry cultural appropriation.

Best just to get rid of all white people and any references to their existence so that an issue is not created.

Since this film is mandatory viewing for everyone on the planet then I agree with shutting it dow-. . . . wait, what?

It's not mandatory?


Then who are the thin-skinned wimps and sissies who want it shut down for anyone else who wants to watch it?

My first wife loved this movie. Made me watch it with her once. God is it long- and awful. Scarlet has to be one of the most unlikable women in movie history. Never understood what she liked about that movie.

a reply to: seasonal

It depicted how blacks were viewed in the 1930s which was pretty crappy.
The slave population also boasted great minds like Frederick Douglass or Booker T Washington and brave couragous people like Harriet Tubman. They were a part of that history but got nary a mention in a movie about the civil war. You need to look a little deeper than its portrayed history because there are in fact two historic times being delt with in the film.

a reply to: Sillyolme

If the movie was made today, there would still need to be parts played by all actors. Would it be nice if the slaves in the movie were the masters? It would be a confusing mess. It is a story.

People shouldn't complain that there are too many oopma loompas in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.

Books like Uncle Tom's Cabin or the account of Nat Turner which were contemporaneous to the war show a better idea of how African American people were viewed in the 1860s.
They weren't considered stupid or lazy. They very often were feared. They outnumbered the whites in the south three to one and rebellion was always on everyone mind along with a continued attempt towards freedom which were very very common. Educating a slave was against the law. They were not stupid people. It was against the law to educate slaves because they were afraid what an educated slave may think and they surely sought to control the thoughts of the slaves. Their very way of life depended on it.
The movie didn't depict this either. So as far as this was history well no. It was history as the producers of the film cared to make it and nothing further. And it gave an inaccurate portrayal of the people who were enslaved.

a reply to: seasonal

You are not getting my point at all. Just forget it alright.

the films way too long for me, in those three decades it was probably shown 7 times due to the running time.

a reply to: seasonal

Offensive? Not even close. So, is it going to be the demand now that literally anything that even references the Civil War is to be labeled as "offensive", and not allowed? Well, fine, and we can do away with all that came about as a result, too, right??

Right?

The book series North and South was about the civil war. They made a miniseries based on the books. There were lots of strong intelligent passionate and even rebellious African-American characters throughout the film and book. There's a way to accurately tell the story and gone with the wind isn't it.
It's a romance tale. Told to the backdrop of the Jim crow era.
Don't give it any more significance than it deserves.
Look I'm not throwing my copy away. I just realize it for what it is.

originally posted by: DrStevenBrule

originally posted by: Plotus
I knew that was coming, we gonn'a burn film archives now ?

All white actors/actresses will be replaced by people of color in order to get rid of systemic racism in the movie industry.

I thought they were already trying to do just that. After all, we have now seen a remake of Annie, with a black starring actress. A little red-headed orphan, clearly white, with a black actress, why, again?

a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

And Roland in the new Dark Tower movie. If you read the books you know this doesn't work. See Detta Walker. I don't get it. Still. A separate issue.

a reply to: Sillyolme

It was all part of the story. You don't like the story. And that's OK.

I imagine you would not want this movie in a slot at the summer movie showings. But be careful, movies have a way of telling a story that is fiction, and that means everyone can complain.

a reply to: DrStevenBrule

Sure there's a real smart idea. Jesus H...

a reply to: Deaf Alien

No not prophetic. It was made years after the war. I think the producers knew how the story ended. Prophetic. Lol. That's funny.

a reply to: xuenchen

Sure it's common knowledge. The movie was an award winner with many talented actors producers costumers the works. It was and still is visually spectacular. Those things don't change the slanted way blacks are portrayed. It doesn't have anything to do with why people would be upset about it.
Why is it even relevant?

a reply to: queenofswords

The book was written during the Jim crow era too.