Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Where did anyone say that slaves enjoyed being slaves? You're being revisionist in that you're taking a movie that was made in 1939 by a major studio based on a book written in 1936 and expecting it to have the same historical context and standards as a movie put out today. It was a product of its time. Because it's not the movie you want it to be doesn't make it inherently terrible, it only means you don't like it.
I don't think that's what he was getting at when he referred to "an age where things happened a certain way."
I don't think that's what he was getting at when he referred to "an age where things happened a certain way."
Big deal. Your anger does not change the FACT that certain people were deemed as slaves and were put to hard labour in a certain age of world history. And period movies made for that age are going to depict that. If you want to get worked up upon something unchangeable like a historical event, then you need to see a therapist. Or take a walk with your dog to the deli. Isn't that what you Brooklyn folks love to do?
Big deal. Your anger does not change the FACT that certain people were deemed as slaves and were put to hard labour in a certain age of world history. And period movies made for that age are going to depict that. If you want to get worked up upon something unchangeable like a historical event, then you need to see a therapist. Or take a walk with your dog to the deli. Isn't that what you Brooklyn folks love to do?
Hmm...worked up over a historical event? So I guess you think Inglorious Basterds was a waste of time? Certainly the events depicted in that film did not play out that way in real life. But you know what? They made the movie because...
Hmm...worked up over a historical event? So I guess you think Inglorious Basterds was a waste of time? Certainly the events depicted in that film did not play out that way in real life. But you know what? They made the movie because...
It was cool to see.
You know what, I'm going to be honest here.
I felt sad for that movie. Not becoz it was badly made, it was still very catchy, but the screaming helplessness that seethes out of films like these. That sense of never-abating revenge that comes out of a community, which seeks to quell its emotions with a fantasy of revisionist revenge.
When I was a kid, I wished that if I had machine guns, and I were on the via dolorosa, I'd shoot Jesus' tormentors and save the saviour. How pathetic is that?
The movie is unfair to the Jews.
True emancipation comes when the past is forgiven and the move is made to the future. If Hitler and the Nazis are still hated, then that's how much of a hold they have on the collective Jewish psyche, which is sad.
Aw man! I read some more about this movie and it looks like they've toned down the script a lot. Apparently a Nat Turner movie wasn't very appealing to Hollywood executives.
Here's how I'd do it.
The movie would be set in Charleston, SC in 1822. The movie would be centered around Denmark Vesey. But instead of a slave tipping off the plantation owners to the insurrection, Vesey and his conspirators kill him first, and then the insurrection succeeds! You would have a scene similar to the one in Gangs of New York where the wealthy are sitting down for dinner to enjoy the shrimp and grits prepared by Mammy and then all of a sudden slaves explode through their window. The rebellion spreads throughout Charleston, and as other plantations get word, they overtake their plantations and start militias.
Without anyone's knowledge, Vesey had been working with the British during the War of 1812 to arrange for military reinforcements. So as soon as the slave rebellion breaks out, the British hit the shores and set fire to Boston. The United States ends up being under the control of the Crown again. End of story.
How does that sound?
I love alternate histories. That would be a great debate on the History forum.
Anyone ever read Steve Barnes book Inshalla? Its an alternate history of the world. Carthage defeats Rome. The Roman empire never happens. Europe is a tribal, underdeveloped place where Viking raiders kidnap german and celtic slaves, then sell them to the North Africans who colononized and hold the eastern half of what is the US. It's about an Irish boy taken as a child, and his ultimate journey to freedom, but its also about the complexities of things and the connections between both sides of the cultural line.
There is a cd with songs from the book by Heather Alexander as well which is wonderful.
The thing is, Steve Barnes takes a subject heavily imbued with issues and transfers the core to one which related without the issues, as science fiction often does. I would love to see this made into a movie, but it won't be. If it was, however. to even fit a story so large into a sitable time, you'd lose most of the subtext.
GWTW suffers from this too. There is so much missing from the movie since its not a miniseries. And its hard for some to see beyond the setting. As a *human* story, its quite remarkable but you have to be willing to see it as that.
My grandfather worked on it, and was there when they burned down the Ben Hur set and filmed the burning of Atlanta. It was the first scene filmed and Scarlett hadn't even been cast. They Atlana set was built after in the same location. Look closely at the burning buildings and you'll notice they don't look much like Atlanta. But it was done with the scope and care that could be then, *and* with the attitudes of the time (as is *all* art). It is also one of the most completly anti-war movies of all time. The scene (probaby only seen fully on a theater screen) of the flag flying over the trainyard as the injured and dying are being evacuated is one of the most visual presentations of the COST of war to anyone up to that time. It was intended.
We should quit judging things written or produced a century or so ago by social standards. Give it another one and see what those around then think of us.
Who cares? Do you think slaves enjoyed picking cotton because it just "happened that certain way?" That didn't mean that slaves didn't fantasize about busting a cap in their slave masters. And could you blame them? Such a movie would not be any different from Inglorious Basterds (also revisionist). I'm sure a slave revenge movie would do well at the box office.
Personally, I would LOVE to see a good movie on the slave revenge and revolt that was the start of Haiti, done as close to actual historical fact as possible. For that matter, there are a couple of relatively decent movies on similar themes, like Hotel Rwanda and King of Scotland.
I fear though that I am again not accepting your basic emotional response. Picking cotton by hand was something that a LOT of southerners did, not just slaves. While I grew up in Vermont, and farm work was common for kids, my neighbors from around here grew up picking cotton by hand, dragging the bags through the field.
The point that was made about reading the diaries of people of the time really makes a basic point. GWTW romanticized to create a story line. Revisionist history can err in the opposite direction. Even dedicated historians argue over what the actual history of a place and era are.
GWTW was a fiction, a movie, meant to make money and give an impression of a romantic life. It was stylized. So was Shaft. So was Color Purple. So was Sounder. So was Birth of a Nation. and so on.
Of course Scarlett is an anti-hero heroine. She wasn't supposed to be likable, or particularly admired.
Skip all the current day PC BS and strip the movie down to core plotline themes. Melanie lives in a fantasy world where everything is wonderful and everyone around her is wonderful. To the extent that she attaches to someone who is successful (Scarlett), she survives. Scarlett rescues her, Scarlett feeds her, Scarlett gives her life context. Scarlett is a greedy manipulative narcissist who takes advantage of people and situations. Rhett lives his own macho semi-military fantasy, but understands and generally likes the people he takes advantage of. Prissy is the idiot employee. Ashley is the nebbish who gets battered around by the wind. There are plenty more underlying characterizations, but those are the primary character motivators.
Every single one of those types of people are alive today, and you will run into them in daily life. Prissy was a rocket scientist compared to some people I have employed. Most politicians are like Rhett, Scarlett, or a combination thereof. Probably 50% of the public in the U.S. wander around in a Melanie-like fabricated world of their own, purposely closing their ears and eyes to anything troubling to them, and dependent on the Scarlett types to keep them alive and feed them.
The film is in large part a social commentary. It reflects the world and gives you a chance to learn about parts of it. The world is but a stage...
Are there problems with the film? Of course. Was it hyped by Hollywood? Of course. Does it have stereotyping and racism? Of course. Is the underlying theme more important than those shortcomings? Of course.
Your distaste for the film reflects something that I have been afraid would happen because of the way Hollywood makes movies. The use of the Hayes code and successor unwritten codes have turned people to expecting that all plots will turn out well in the end, that the protagonists are always heroes or heroines, and that all criminals will get their just end.
Life is NOT that way. The greedy and narcissistic DO make it to the top. Some criminals get off scot free. People trounce on each other and scramble for whatever they think has value. GWTW was important NOT because of the use of "Frankly my dear I don't give a damn." and the continuing censorship of that word and others that allow the Melanie fantasists to live in bliss, but because it dared to break out of the idea that "Miss Scarlett" had to be a perfect lady.
You are railing because "Dick and Jane" did more than "Run Dick Run, see the bad guys chase Dick" (a la Forest Gump), but had more complexity of character and more darkside than in the other kindergarten quality film "product" that you are used to seeing.
A LOT of good films are troubling and even hard to watch. Some of them are simply unfathomable to a large segment of the population without the guidance of film buffs and critics.
Yes, all of this. This is all what I wanted to say but couldn't have done nearly as well. Like any good novel (and movie), the main characters are complex, just like real people. In real life an obnoxious, irritating prick may actually help a lot of people in various ways that aren't apparent at first, and likewise a sweet, lovable class favorite may actually be manipulative and disctructive, and have everyone fooled. Discovering unexpected character traits is one thing I love about all my favorite novels, and I enjoy seeing it in movies, too. That being said, everyone has his/her own taste in everything, and I know not everyone will like this movie or any other. That reminds me, I need to read the novel.
What if Mammy just kept tightening Scarlett's corset during this scene until she died of asphyxiation? It would have been awesome! It would have served Scarlett right because (1) she was an a-hole and (2) she was a slave-owning a-hole on top of it.
And what happens to Mammy? And she raised Scarlett, and cares about her. No, it would not be awesome, but completely unrealistic. People adjust to survive.
And what happens to Mammy? And she raised Scarlett, and cares about her. No, it would not be awesome, but completely unrealistic. People adjust to survive.
It would have been totally awesome! Mammy would have teamed up with the other slaves and taken down Twelve Oaks.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
