I've had very disheartening conversations on Reddit about this. First of all (as pointed out here), this is temporary. The movies will be back, along with some disclaimer or PSA about the culture...
I've had very disheartening conversations on Reddit about this. First of all (as pointed out here), this is temporary. The movies will be back, along with some disclaimer or PSA about the culture that produced them. I really can't see how this is a bad thing - it provides audiences with more context and as such they can better critically evaluate it as well as the society that produced it. Struggling to see how this is 'censorship' as I've seen claimed elsewhere.
This isn't even a case of judging something by its own time, or looking at things through a modern lens. There were plenty of people (namely African Americans) who understood even in 1939 that GWTW's portrayal of slaves and the Black community in America was regressive. People understood even then that it was an example of the dominant culture (white) dictating how minorities should be viewed and what roles they could play in movies. It was protested at the time in some cities even. But now people think it was perfectly acceptable then and now it's just 'cancel culture' gone wild or whatever.
This obviously isn't in response to any comment here - I've just been very frustrated with discussions I've had about this today.
@Rez made some persuasive points regarding the irrelevance of this movie to current generations and I tend to agree. When I watched it years ago the racism went way over my head, or at least...
@Rez made some persuasive points regarding the irrelevance of this movie to current generations and I tend to agree. When I watched it years ago the racism went way over my head, or at least didn’t seem particularly egregious considering the time period. It was like an old cartoon or something in a museum. I am black and a film major, but I’m also not American so I’m probably less sensitive to the particular presentations and history of racism in the United States.
About Reddit, I only read comments on this kind of stuff when I’m prepared to get angry, and that doesn’t happen very often.
I definitely agree that considering the time period it could have been worse. But I'm certainly not the first one to point out the issues with its portrayal of African Americans (and, granted, I...
I definitely agree that considering the time period it could have been worse. But I'm certainly not the first one to point out the issues with its portrayal of African Americans (and, granted, I am not an expert), and I just don't get the hullabaloo over a PSA about it.
I agree with @Rez's points above too. In the grand scheme of things this really doesn't matter, which again makes me confused when I see the outrage online about it. This film was probably not radicalizing anyone, but most people probably aren't really aware that its portrayals reinforce stereotypes created and perpetuated by white people in the US. I don't see how pointing that out can hurt anyone.
People have been asking for this for years. I think a bunch of companies have had a sudden realisation: they need to make these changes with a bit more urgency.
People have been asking for this for years. I think a bunch of companies have had a sudden realisation: they need to make these changes with a bit more urgency.
As someone who went to school for and has studied film and film history for a decade, this is something that has been discussed for decades, and I feel that it’s important to emphasize here:...
As someone who went to school for and has studied film and film history for a decade, this is something that has been discussed for decades, and I feel that it’s important to emphasize here: CONTEXT MATTERS.
We shouldn’t erase a movie simply because it’s problematic. If we did that, we would lose many movies that are extremely important in the development of film (I’m looking at you Birth of a Nation and Triumph of the Will). We need to do exactly what they are doing here: present them with context.
For example, Triumph of the Will presents an extremely important look at just how powerful moving images can be. Should we watch it “for fun” like we would an action movie? No, but we should discuss it and continue to teach it in academic classes, given the appropriate disclaimers because it’s a look at how the same things that make film such a fantastic form of escapism can be used for evil too.
Following a scathing opinion piece in the Los Angeles Times by 12 Years a Slave writer John Ridley in which he called for the removal of Gone with the Wind from HBO Max, WarnerMedia has done just that — but only temporarily.
WarnerMedia is doing the right thing here. John Ridley is being silly if he thinks pretending these movies never happened is a good idea, or if he thinks we shouldn't be allowed to appreciate them...
WarnerMedia is doing the right thing here. John Ridley is being silly if he thinks pretending these movies never happened is a good idea, or if he thinks we shouldn't be allowed to appreciate them while understanding the historical context in which they were made. He's only making the problem worse by taking such a hard-line stance.
Warner made a similar decision with the release of a number of Looney Tunes shorts on DVD/Blu-Ray, presenting them completely unaltered along with a gentle reminder that the stereotypes and prejudices on display were just as wrong 60 years ago as they are today.
I wish Disney had the guts to do this with Song of the South, or the original version of Fantasia.
John Ridley is being silly if he thinks pretending these movies never happened is a good idea
He doesn't think that. He said:
Let me be real clear: I don’t believe in censorship. I don’t think “Gone With the Wind” should be relegated to a vault in Burbank. I would just ask, after a respectful amount of time has passed, that the film be re-introduced to the HBO Max platform along with other films that give a more broad-based and complete picture of what slavery and the Confederacy truly were.
I've had very disheartening conversations on Reddit about this. First of all (as pointed out here), this is temporary. The movies will be back, along with some disclaimer or PSA about the culture that produced them. I really can't see how this is a bad thing - it provides audiences with more context and as such they can better critically evaluate it as well as the society that produced it. Struggling to see how this is 'censorship' as I've seen claimed elsewhere.
This isn't even a case of judging something by its own time, or looking at things through a modern lens. There were plenty of people (namely African Americans) who understood even in 1939 that GWTW's portrayal of slaves and the Black community in America was regressive. People understood even then that it was an example of the dominant culture (white) dictating how minorities should be viewed and what roles they could play in movies. It was protested at the time in some cities even. But now people think it was perfectly acceptable then and now it's just 'cancel culture' gone wild or whatever.
This obviously isn't in response to any comment here - I've just been very frustrated with discussions I've had about this today.
@Rez made some persuasive points regarding the irrelevance of this movie to current generations and I tend to agree. When I watched it years ago the racism went way over my head, or at least didn’t seem particularly egregious considering the time period. It was like an old cartoon or something in a museum. I am black and a film major, but I’m also not American so I’m probably less sensitive to the particular presentations and history of racism in the United States.
About Reddit, I only read comments on this kind of stuff when I’m prepared to get angry, and that doesn’t happen very often.
I definitely agree that considering the time period it could have been worse. But I'm certainly not the first one to point out the issues with its portrayal of African Americans (and, granted, I am not an expert), and I just don't get the hullabaloo over a PSA about it.
I agree with @Rez's points above too. In the grand scheme of things this really doesn't matter, which again makes me confused when I see the outrage online about it. This film was probably not radicalizing anyone, but most people probably aren't really aware that its portrayals reinforce stereotypes created and perpetuated by white people in the US. I don't see how pointing that out can hurt anyone.
A PSA in the beginning of a film is fine and I’m totally okay with that.
Hold up, where did it say they're adding PSAs throughout the film?
I promptly edited my previous comment after rechecking. It’s definitely not clear that that’s what the spokesperson meant.
People have been asking for this for years. I think a bunch of companies have had a sudden realisation: they need to make these changes with a bit more urgency.
It looks like it. And I agree with you in the other points.
As someone who went to school for and has studied film and film history for a decade, this is something that has been discussed for decades, and I feel that it’s important to emphasize here: CONTEXT MATTERS.
We shouldn’t erase a movie simply because it’s problematic. If we did that, we would lose many movies that are extremely important in the development of film (I’m looking at you Birth of a Nation and Triumph of the Will). We need to do exactly what they are doing here: present them with context.
For an idea of what this means, the introductions that Whoopi Goldberg did for the Looney Toons Collections. To me, those are the gold standard for how you handle something like this.
For example, Triumph of the Will presents an extremely important look at just how powerful moving images can be. Should we watch it “for fun” like we would an action movie? No, but we should discuss it and continue to teach it in academic classes, given the appropriate disclaimers because it’s a look at how the same things that make film such a fantastic form of escapism can be used for evil too.
WarnerMedia is doing the right thing here. John Ridley is being silly if he thinks pretending these movies never happened is a good idea, or if he thinks we shouldn't be allowed to appreciate them while understanding the historical context in which they were made. He's only making the problem worse by taking such a hard-line stance.
Warner made a similar decision with the release of a number of Looney Tunes shorts on DVD/Blu-Ray, presenting them completely unaltered along with a gentle reminder that the stereotypes and prejudices on display were just as wrong 60 years ago as they are today.
I wish Disney had the guts to do this with Song of the South, or the original version of Fantasia.
He doesn't think that. He said:
What does he mean by "respectful amount of time"? The Civil War was over 150 years ago. Should the film be locked away for centuries?
I don’t think that’s what he meant. Not that I know what he meant.