Gone With the Wind
This is why there is a problem, if you cant see why there needs to be education about the movie then you are the problem
Long before Viola Davis’s Oscar nomination in The Help, though, Hattie McDaniel would be the first black actor in Hollywood to be nominated and win in 1940 for her role as the dutiful servant Mammy in Gone With the Wind. McDaniel was not allowed to attend the film’s 1939 premiere in Atlanta because of her race. And though she would make history at the 1940 Oscars ceremony at the Ambassador hotel in Los Angeles she was forced to sit in a segregated “colored section” separate from the white actors in an area created specifically for her during the evening’s event. McDaniel’s role in the film was such a fundamentally stereotypical representation of white society’s desired way to see black women that her character’s name, Mammy, came to be descriptive of that particularly pervasive stereotype. The sassy, cantankerous, asexual Mammy was a caricature of black womanhood and McDaniel was made to endure the implications of this caricature in the racist treatment she received on and off screen.
_________________
WRLL
It's kinda sad, really ... I used to like the movie, back when all that was necessary to entertain me was a solid plot, well-written dialog, good acting, fine costumes, and expansive sets.
Now that I know what I know about the author, the book she wrote, the historical backdrop, and the misrepresentations of slavery, I feel the sensation of cold ashes on my tongue, like I've swallowed something rotten.
Sad, very sad.
![]()
_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.
Oh okay but I think you could say this about any movie from a different era though, where there are things in it you may not agree with it, but that doesn't make the movie bad does it?
For example, the movie Mildred Pierce (1945) is about a woman who opens up a restaurant franchise, in order to take care of her and her daughter, and the other characters in the movie do not like her doing this, and think she is too feminist for doing so. But just because things were different back then, does that make it a bad movie?
While the production quality has withstood the test of time, the content has not. Unfortunately, if the offensive parts were excised, it would not remain the same movie.
For example, "Frankly, my dear, I no longer have any concern for your welfare" just does not have the same punch-in-the-gut impact of Rhett's original parting line.
_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.
And yes, just because you cut out some content of the movie, doesn't mean that people who hate the movie, are now going to change their mind on it.
For example one movie I hate is The Human Centipede. But if you were to cut out all the parts I hate, and then show it to me again, with those parts removed, I would still hate the movie, because it's still that movie.
Isn't cutting down Gone with the Wind, like beating a dead horse, and you cannot make people like it, who hate it?
Long before Viola Davis’s Oscar nomination in The Help, though, Hattie McDaniel would be the first black actor in Hollywood to be nominated and win in 1940 for her role as the dutiful servant Mammy in Gone With the Wind. McDaniel was not allowed to attend the film’s 1939 premiere in Atlanta because of her race. And though she would make history at the 1940 Oscars ceremony at the Ambassador hotel in Los Angeles she was forced to sit in a segregated “colored section” separate from the white actors in an area created specifically for her during the evening’s event. McDaniel’s role in the film was such a fundamentally stereotypical representation of white society’s desired way to see black women that her character’s name, Mammy, came to be descriptive of that particularly pervasive stereotype. The sassy, cantankerous, asexual Mammy was a caricature of black womanhood and McDaniel was made to endure the implications of this caricature in the racist treatment she received on and off screen.
But there are lots of movies where the actors or crew have to put up with crap, while making the movie. That doesn't mean there needs to be education about it does it? People know what the past was like, they don't need any further education on it, do they? Plus, who says that the character was asexual? Just because we do not see her with any love interests?
ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 39,637
Location: Long Island, New York
The book the movie was based on promoted the Lost Cause mythology of the civil war.
Spike Lee says 'Gone with the Wind,' 'Birth of a Nation' 'should be seen'
"Well, ironically, [Lee's 2018 film] 'BlacKkKlansman' begins with one of the most famous shots of all cinema -- the scene where Scarlett O’Hara is walking amongst the dead and wounded after the big battle in the Civil War," Lee said.
"I think that that should be seen," Lee added. "I think that one of the most racist films ever, D.W. Griffith's 'Birth of a Nation' should be seen. I show that film in my class. I’m a tenured professor at NYU ... I show 'Birth of a Nation.'"
Lee's comments came days after streaming service HBO Max dropped "Gone with the Wind" before indicating it would be returned to the service with additional context surrounding its racial content.
"The View" co-host Whoopi Goldberg recently pushed back on HBO's decision, as well as Paramount's cancellation of the long-running reality show "COPS."
"Personally, I think if you put things in a historical context — because if you start pulling every film ... you're going to have to pull all of the blaxploitation movies because they're not depicting us the right way," said Goldberg. "That's a very long list of films."
Goldberg does have a tenuous tie to "Gone with the Wind." In 1991, she won the Best Supporting Actress Oscar for her performance in "Ghost." Goldberg was the second African-American woman to win an Academy Award for acting. The first, Hattie McDaniel, won the same prize 51 years earlier for her performance as the slave Mammy in "Gone with the Wind."
Bolding=Mine
So Spike Lee is against cancel culture, good for him.
_________________
“Self Acceptance is a process not a performance”
“You are autistic enough. And you always have been”
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity.
Long before Viola Davis’s Oscar nomination in The Help, though, Hattie McDaniel would be the first black actor in Hollywood to be nominated and win in 1940 for her role as the dutiful servant Mammy in Gone With the Wind. McDaniel was not allowed to attend the film’s 1939 premiere in Atlanta because of her race. And though she would make history at the 1940 Oscars ceremony at the Ambassador hotel in Los Angeles she was forced to sit in a segregated “colored section” separate from the white actors in an area created specifically for her during the evening’s event. McDaniel’s role in the film was such a fundamentally stereotypical representation of white society’s desired way to see black women that her character’s name, Mammy, came to be descriptive of that particularly pervasive stereotype. The sassy, cantankerous, asexual Mammy was a caricature of black womanhood and McDaniel was made to endure the implications of this caricature in the racist treatment she received on and off screen.
So is Hattie McDaniel perhaps an "Uncle Tom" then to a lot of people, because she sold out in a sense?
For example, "Frankly, my dear, I no longer have any concern for your welfare" just does not have the same punch-in-the-gut impact of Rhett's original parting line.
This is the most boneheaded thing Ive read in a long time. Boneheaded because you are missing your own point.
Clark Gable's parting line caused a ruckus at the time the movie was released, because it was considered offensive AT THAT TIME!
And...nothing ELSE in the movie was considered offensive at THAT TIME.
Today its completely flipped around. Today folks wonder why Clark Cable was so polite, and didnt say "frankly Scarlett I dont give a stinkin rats ass" ( movies are more profane today, not less so) . But today, the entire original rest of the movie is considered offensive because of modern political correctness.
We were puritanical one way back then, and we are puritanical another different way now.
If you wanna see a movie that was made just as the old kinda puritanism was dying, but before the modern pc kinda puritanism kicked in, watch Mel Brookes's "Blazing Saddles" from the early Seventies. Though an anti racist movie it plays around and kids around with many racial stereotypes and gets away with it in ways you cant today. And its also risque' in ways that they couldnt be in earlier movies. Best of both worlds. Or the worst of both worlds.
========================
Interesting input from Spike Lee above.
Well?
Here's your chance. Don't blow it this time...
_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.
Well?
Here's your chance. Don't blow it this time...
I already made my point, and went on to make another point ...about Mel Brooks.
Cant you read?
What are you talking about?
I don't really understand or like much this thing of many people just suddenly denouncing or declaring no longer a like for something because it appears to people as racist or other kinds of bigoted. Did you even like it before?
Why should people or things that may have done or said things that were even merely a little racist or bigoted many years ago be condemned completely for just those actions? That sounds an awful lot like religious fundamentalism. Are we not living in "1984" or "Fahrenheit 451"?
The thing about this, is that it's lead other types of censorship of entertainment to occur. I just heard that on the Simpson's they pressured the actor doing the voices of non-white characters to leave the show.
So how far is this going to go now? Are they going to take the Star Wars movies and recut them so that James Earl Jones is not voicing a white villain, and get a white actor to do it, down the road for example?
