أغنية الجنوب

In the Old South Uncle Remus (James Baskett) a black slave tells stories to white Johnny (Bobby Driscoll). They're shown in animated form...beautifully done by Disney. OK--this film is NOT racist and Disney is being stupid by not releasing it. The last time I saw it was in its last (I believe) theatrical reissue back in the 1980s. I don't remember anybody complaining about it being racist back then. Yes, the slaves are shown as being SO happy and love working for the white people...but "Gone With the Wind" had the same view and I don't see MGM keeping it from being shown or anyone complaining about it. There's nothing wrong with being politically correct but Disney really overdoes it. Hell--they changed ONE LINE from a song in "Aladdin" because one group complained about it! Idiots. Back to the movie. The print I saw was in bright beautiful color with a crystal clear picture and sound. The animated segments were just great--there was one fantastic moment when Baskett started singing "Dippidy Doo Dah" and the background burst into animation. The chances of anyone seeing this are slim but, if you can, take a look. Recommended.

I can't even tell you how old I was when I saw this movie but I was pretty young. I would love to get a copy of that movie now. I don't understand why it's locked in a vault,if it was worth making it should be worth viewing. The stories in this movie are unforgettable, the song I sing nearly everyday of my life and I don't believe that anyone should be deprived from seeing this wonderful movie. I don't see anything offensive in this movie and it's a pity that anyone would. I love Disney, I love Disney movies, I really wish that Disney would put this film out for those of us who would, and those who could, enjoy it. It is sad that Disney fears offending people now, when it wasn't an issue nearly 60 years ago. It's just as good a movie now as it was then. It's like Disney is saying they didn't care what they did then but they do now. They should be the same and realize that you can't take it back, so let the people see it!

When I was 8 years old, Walt Disney created this great and enduring classic, his first picture to include live actors and to mix them with animation. It was one of the very few pictures in that era to employ Black actors, and the undisputed hero of the film was a Black man. The film portrays a pervasive tone of positive values, and incidentally the best portrayal of interactions between Whites and Blacks of any film I've ever seen. There are no "slaves" in the movie, and I doubt Walt Disney gave any thought to slavery since there weren't any slaves in the post-Civil War South. Still, Michael Eisner and other latter-day Disney executives have relegated this classic to the vaults. Easily one of Walt Disney's top 5 movies, anyone ought to acquire this wonderful picture for their family library. Since the film was on the market in the UK for a few weeks before being pulled-off forever, you can buy one on eBay (from other sellers, not me). Mine cost me over $100; a small price for Freedom of Speech; a small price for a true classic not otherwise available.

In the past few years, Disney has gone though great trouble to re-release many movies onto DVD as 'collectors' editions. They've even released the old cartoons shorts onto DVD with collector tins, numbered, the whole shebang...but yet, they have yet to release Song of the South. It's a shame that such a large piece of Disney History must remain buried for only hard core fans to buy from third parties. This movie may have a racial undertone (although a child probably wouldn't see it), and it's a shame that there are those who are so easily offended at a piece of American history (slavery, not the movie) that they can't even sit down to watch (or not watch and just accept the release of Song of the South). It's as if it's PC to pretend slavery never happened by not releasing a movie that contains it. I'm sure "Roots" was a big mistake. This movie provides audiences with some of Disney's MOST famous songs including "The Laughing Place" and "Zip-A-Dee-Doo-Da". If you were to ask someone where Zip-A-Dee-Doo-Da chances are they won't know. (and saying "Disney" isn't a fair answer.) It's shocking how Disney has become so famous for a song that was never allowed to be released in the US. (Not to mention one of the most famous rides at Disneyland is based on this movie. Didn't you ever wonder about those animals during the Splash Mountain log ride?) All in all, this is a GOOD movie and anyone who loves Disney or cartoons should see it.

I am really annoyed by Disney's decision to withhold Song of the South from release. They seem to think that by banning this film they could appease the charge of spreading racism. In fact, by banning this film they have given the false impression that Song of the South is a racist film that would corrupt children. As a previous viewer pointed out, the film does NOT depict slavery. It takes place in the years following the civil war. Yes, it shows blacks as servants of whites, but this did indeed occur didn't it? Nor does it depict blacks as entirely submissive servants to whites. Look at the way Uncle Remus defies Johnny's mother by covering for him. Uncle Remus has his own subtle ways of rebelling against his white employers. What's more, Uncle Remus is not a racist caracature. He is a kind and smart man with a lot of common sense. The film even takes on race relations in the friendship Johnny strikes up with Uncle Remus and a black boy. We end of disapproving of Johnny's mother's narrow minded attitude toward their relationship. This is probably the closest the non-political Disney studios could come to making a liberal film. It's incredible therefore that it is the NAACP that protested this film whenever it was released instead of the KKK. The NAACP reminds me more of little Johnny's white prejudiced mother than campaigners for racial equality. I am even more angered by Disney's decision to keep this film off the video shelves. They probably could have gotten Song of the South out on video after it's 1986 release with minimal controversy. Instead, by banning this film they have helped to harden opinions on both sides between those who want to keep this film off the video shelves (many of whom probably haven't even seen it), and those who want it released. They have made a political firestorm of their own creation.