[MrV]

IllusionOfLife wrote:

Do you really think a film from 65 years ago with fairly tame racial stereotypes will seriously cause adults to stop purchasing Disney products or visiting the Disney parks? I get your argument, but to be honest, I don't think it's any worse than the non-black stereotypes in other Disney films that have not been censored (What Makes the Red Man Red in Peter Pan, anybody?) You're right, because of the civil war, the civil rights movement, and the fact that our nation took longer than many other 'western' cultures to give black citizens equal rights it's a bigger controversy here than it is everywhere else in the world, and there will be a number of people even after release who will stand up and say how offended they are by this film, and how irresponsible Disney was for releasing it. However, I bet you anything, it will be more controversy for the sake of controversy, and out of these people there will be very few who are legitimately offended and more who are just trying to make a scene. There are stereotypes in this film, but none are derogatory, and I don't think there's any legitimate justification to keep this movie under wraps so long. Give it a PG rating, release it through Touchstone rather than Walt Disney Pictures, get every black actor to ever work in a Disney film to do a disclaimer at the beginning of the disc, I don't care, but it's far more damaging to hide a piece of history away than it is to release something that may not be considered politically correct now.

The problem is that social leaders, such as Jessie Jackson, turn this from a blip into a god damned beacon of rage. The reason why you can get away with native american sterotypes is that they don't have that cental figure, look at how hard they have tried to get the Atlanta Braves to change their way.

The big problem with the film is that it gives a "it's not so bad" look to the whole slavery issue. Imagine a similar movie but set in Nazi Germany, there would be outcry at the studios for years, even if their Hitler Dance number was epic. They will never release it simply because it has the Disney name right in the title. As you have noted, the news media runs on a fuel of controversy and they try to stay above it all by not stirring it. The second they even hint at thinking of releasing it there will be a wave of rage directed at them. Look at how well "Confederate Heritage Month" was recieved. You can have every great African American who ever lived come out and say it's fine but it will all look like they are "Uncle Toming" it.

I would say, just let it stay dead, enjoy your copy, and move on because there is no way this movie would ever be socially appropriate.


Look at how much crap A&F got over this. They are still trying to shake off being overtly racist.

[MrV]

BrerRabbit24 wrote:

Yeah, bellhop - most of the union issue questions were from guys that work as bell hops at Disney hotels. I understand their concern but for the rest of us there it got a bit annoying. Questions about movies may seem "off-topic" for you but they got some of the most applause since movies are a big part of Disney and what people are interested in. Union issues should be left to meetings with execs and others. And to be honest, part of why the people bringing up union disputes were annoying was because they were the ones that took the most time and went well over the 2 minute limit. I tried to keep it short and would have liked more time but the dispute guys took WAY too much time. Bottom line, Disney is different than other companies. We aren't discussing coffee or iPods or whatever - we are discussing movies and Parks - when it comes down to it that is the heart of Disney and where the most of the revenue comes from.

Union stuff... eh... that is kind of on topic. But while movie stuff got applause it doesn't mean it was on topic. Everyone in the audience may be huge fans and own a whole share of stock but it doesn't mean that asking questions about bluray releases of specific titles is really relevant. Now if it was something like "How does the company plan to adapt to the predicted death of disc format movies?" then that is on topic. Broad strokes yes, fandom questions no.

[IllusionOfLife]

Do you really think a film from 65 years ago with fairly tame racial stereotypes will seriously cause adults to stop purchasing Disney products or visiting the Disney parks? I get your argument, but to be honest, I don't think it's any worse than the non-black stereotypes in other Disney films that have not been censored (What Makes the Red Man Red in Peter Pan, anybody?)

You're right, because of the civil war, the civil rights movement, and the fact that our nation took longer than many other 'western' cultures to give black citizens equal rights it's a bigger controversy here than it is everywhere else in the world, and there will be a number of people even after release who will stand up and say how offended they are by this film, and how irresponsible Disney was for releasing it. However, I bet you anything, it will be more controversy for the sake of controversy, and out of these people there will be very few who are legitimately offended and more who are just trying to make a scene.

There are stereotypes in this film, but none are derogatory, and I don't think there's any legitimate justification to keep this movie under wraps so long. Give it a PG rating, release it through Touchstone rather than Walt Disney Pictures, get every black actor to ever work in a Disney film to do a disclaimer at the beginning of the disc, I don't care, but it's far more damaging to hide a piece of history away than it is to release something that may not be considered politically correct now.

[BrerRabbit24]

Yeah, bellhop - most of the union issue questions were from guys that work as bell hops at Disney hotels. I understand their concern but for the rest of us there it got a bit annoying. Questions about movies may seem "off-topic" for you but they got some of the most applause since movies are a big part of Disney and what people are interested in. Union issues should be left to meetings with execs and others.

And to be honest, part of why the people bringing up union disputes were annoying was because they were the ones that took the most time and went well over the 2 minute limit. I tried to keep it short and would have liked more time but the dispute guys took WAY too much time.

Bottom line, Disney is different than other companies. We aren't discussing coffee or iPods or whatever - we are discussing movies and Parks - when it comes down to it that is the heart of Disney and where the most of the revenue comes from.

[MrV]

BrerRabbit24 wrote:

Yeah, that was getting annoying. I know that may be the only place where they "think" they are heard. It seemed like every other question was a bell-hop and it was getting annoying. I wish it had left more time for other questions. I had also liked to ask about why more catalog Disney titles are not re-released on Blu-ray instead of just DVD, like the 45th Anniversary Mary Poppins that was put just on DVD. I had thought about including that in the beginning of my question but it was getting very short on time since it was after noon and I was just glad that they had kept it going long enough for me to get my questions in.

A bellhop?

With those events (I don't bother going even though I have shares), they have turned into "fan events" rather than serious buisness. Not to disparage your questions, but they were not really "company direction" or "further explanation of a topic in the presentation" questions but rather a tangent.

If you have ever been to a shareholder presentation at other companies, they are a lot stricter about the question time. Disney's has devolved into something more like a presentation at D23.

[MrV]

IllusionOfLife wrote:

MrV wrote: Sort answer on song of the south "We own it and we can do what we want" long answer is that it would probably hurt them more than if they went on camera and punched puppies for an hour a week. Apparently (I trust wiki about as much as I trust a stranger) even Ebert is fine with them not releasing the movie because it sends a message made back in the "stupid days" when it was cool to string up a black guy for touching a white woman. They may do a Library of Congress thing where a print is sent there but that's about as far as it will ever get. I own a bootleg copy of the movie and, to be honest, the worst thing you can call it is mediocre. There isn't anything even remotely racist or derogatory in the portrayal of the black characters in the film, in fact, Uncle Remus is far wiser than any of the white characters. Not only that, but it eludes to the fact that the boy's father is fighting for the rights of African American citizens. However, it's gotten a bad rap for "portraying the slave/master relationship in a romanticized light." Sure, there may be some sort of truth to that statement, but the point of the movie was not to make a statement on the treatment of Blacks one way or another and the film consciously avoids that topic. I honestly believe if Disney were to release this film, it'd sell like hotcakes due to the controversy, and then it'd be met with a collective "That's it?That's what all the fuss was about?" Slap a disclaimer on the front of the movie by James Earl Jones or Whoopie Goldberg, and I think it'd be fine. The controversy has been spread by word of mouth from those who have never seen the film, and it's been greatly exaggerated. I'm not even that big a fan of the movie, I think it's actually really mediocre, but I'm strongly against the censorship of a piece of film and animation history. I think the real problem here is not that they're actually too ashamed of the film to release it, but rather they're afraid to break the status quo. For 65 years Disney has chosen not to release the film for one reason or another and I think the biggest problem is that they don't want to have to deal with any potential backlash, however unfounded, if they're the ones to release it.

The problem is that the Uncle Remus character is a sterotype. It would be akin to "Asians are good at math", not the worst thing you can say but you're slapping a label on them that they do not want. There are no two ways about it, they do portay slavery in the US in a romantic light (which did exist in some cases). There is no mention of slave hunters, or that he is property.

Overall it's not the worst thing in the world (having seen it myself), but it's too racist for Disney to release under their brand name. You have to remember that they also have to consider how it will impact future sales. They probably know it would sell well in the short term, because everyone wants to see the forbidden film. But eventually it would catch up to the company that wants everything to be family friendly (unless you're under a different brand they own, such as Death Row Records).

It's been released over and over, in theaters, till the 80's, but when home media came into play they elected not to release it. I know you can note it has been released everywhere else but the civil war is still a sore spot in this nation's history. Look at the uproar a confederate flag causes. The other countries don't have the same context we do, so they don't see the problem in the same way.

If they though the blowback on this would be minimal they would have released it already, but something of this nature would have massive consequences for them when it came to people buying movies/tickets, merch, and booking vacations with them. This is one of many "Die-hards see things far differently" kind of things. They loved Horizons, but it was a dead zone towards the end of it's life.

[BrerRabbit24]

Yeah, that was getting annoying. I know that may be the only place where they "think" they are heard. It seemed like every other question was a bell-hop and it was getting annoying. I wish it had left more time for other questions. I had also liked to ask about why more catalog Disney titles are not re-released on Blu-ray instead of just DVD, like the 45th Anniversary Mary Poppins that was put just on DVD. I had thought about including that in the beginning of my question but it was getting very short on time since it was after noon and I was just glad that they had kept it going long enough for me to get my questions in.

[IllusionOfLife]

MrV wrote:

Sort answer on song of the south "We own it and we can do what we want" long answer is that it would probably hurt them more than if they went on camera and punched puppies for an hour a week. Apparently (I trust wiki about as much as I trust a stranger) even Ebert is fine with them not releasing the movie because it sends a message made back in the "stupid days" when it was cool to string up a black guy for touching a white woman. They may do a Library of Congress thing where a print is sent there but that's about as far as it will ever get.

I own a bootleg copy of the movie and, to be honest, the worst thing you can call it is mediocre. There isn't anything even remotely racist or derogatory in the portrayal of the black characters in the film, in fact, Uncle Remus is far wiser than any of the white characters. Not only that, but it eludes to the fact that the boy's father is fighting for the rights of African American citizens. However, it's gotten a bad rap for "portraying the slave/master relationship in a romanticized light." Sure, there may be some sort of truth to that statement, but the point of the movie was not to make a statement on the treatment of Blacks one way or another and the film consciously avoids that topic.

I honestly believe if Disney were to release this film, it'd sell like hotcakes due to the controversy, and then it'd be met with a collective "That's it?That's what all the fuss was about?" Slap a disclaimer on the front of the movie by James Earl Jones or Whoopie Goldberg, and I think it'd be fine. The controversy has been spread by word of mouth from those who have never seen the film, and it's been greatly exaggerated.

I'm not even that big a fan of the movie, I think it's actually really mediocre, but I'm strongly against the censorship of a piece of film and animation history.

I think the real problem here is not that they're actually too ashamed of the film to release it, but rather they're afraid to break the status quo. For 65 years Disney has chosen not to release the film for one reason or another and I think the biggest problem is that they don't want to have to deal with any potential backlash, however unfounded, if they're the ones to release it.

Also, off the off-topic topic, will these guys from Unite Here: Local 11 ever give it a rest? It seemed like every other 'question' was a pointed rant, and it wasted a ton of time. I'd be way more sympathetic if they didn't keep pulling these borderline slanderous stunts and just sat down and negotiated like adults.

[MrV]

IllusionOfLife wrote:

It was a little annoying how dismissive they were of the TRON 3 question, but I suppose it's to be expected because "I don't know," is probably the most honest answer they could give, save for "we'll see how well it does on Blu-Ray." As for Song of the South, I was more than just a little annoyed by that response. I guess an outright "no" is better than just being strung along for years but if I was at that meeting I would have asked them point blank why the company feels the need to censor the work of artists of whom made the art of animation, let alone the company, what it is today. The fact that Fantasia still crops out "offensive" parts of the frame during a few segments, the fact that several of the 'package features' have been censored on all of their previous releases, and the fact that Song of the South will never have a home video release in the United States is an outright atrocity. They're not only pieces of the company's history, but valuable pieces of the history of the art form. To hide them away and hope people forget them is wrong.

They weren't really dismissive, especially with the internet making all news travel as fast as you can type it in, they have to be far more conservative in what they say. If they cannot get a script, a cast, a design, a director, etc. without going way over budget and meeting other criteria then they won't be making another one.

Sort answer on song of the south "We own it and we can do what we want" long answer is that it would probably hurt them more than if they went on camera and punched puppies for an hour a week. Apparently (I trust wiki about as much as I trust a stranger) even Ebert is fine with them not releasing the movie because it sends a message made back in the "stupid days" when it was cool to string up a black guy for touching a white woman. They may do a Library of Congress thing where a print is sent there but that's about as far as it will ever get.

[BrerRabbit24]

Yes, that was me at the end of the meeting with the last questions. And no worries about OT - actually, my top priority for the meeting actually was to ask about Song of the South. I too was a bit annoyed with the response by Bob Iger - I can now at least say I have conversed with the Pres and CEO of Disney, lol. If thought it was funny when he said he thought and was hoping I was referring to Peter Pan - I purposely swapped the movie title with IT in the quote I read to leave it hanging what movie I was talking about. One good sign - two actually - Both my question about Song of the South and the Tron question received lots of cheers and applause. So if anything, they know that shareholders are wanting both of these things. I might look into a shareholder proposal for next year to call for a Blu-ray release of Song of the South - I don't know if such a proposal has been tried. I would think it would very easily pass a shareholder vote.

As for Tron 3, I guessed that if it wasn't announced by them, they wouldn't say anything anyways - but my asking lets them know I(we) want to see it happen.

Other cool OT things about the meeting - Thor trailer was shown with footage that to me seemed new. At the end of Bob Iger's presentation, he surprised us with a screening of the first Toy Story Toon - Hawaiian Honeymoon. You will notice in the webcast that it was edited from the recording. I will say, it is very funny and will be worth the wait until Cars 2 comes out. Plus, during the Q&A, a long time share holder brought up the fact that when he first went to meetings long ago, Walt Disney gave everyone there a pass to Disneyland and called for them to do so since that is what Walt would have said - Have them go to Disneyland, and he said if not everybody, at least he and his brother and that he had a SASE - Chairman John Pepper asked for the SASE and then agreed that that is what Walt would have wished and decided that everyone in attendance would get a pass to Disneyland! Also, the ESPN montage shown had snippets of Utah College sports, including USU Aggies(woot woot!) U of U, and BYU's Jimmer.

[IllusionOfLife]

It was a little annoying how dismissive they were of the TRON 3 question, but I suppose it's to be expected because "I don't know," is probably the most honest answer they could give, save for "we'll see how well it does on Blu-Ray."

As for Song of the South, I was more than just a little annoyed by that response. I guess an outright "no" is better than just being strung along for years but if I was at that meeting I would have asked them point blank why the company feels the need to censor the work of artists of whom made the art of animation, let alone the company, what it is today. The fact that Fantasia still crops out "offensive" parts of the frame during a few segments, the fact that several of the 'package features' have been censored on all of their previous releases, and the fact that Song of the South will never have a home video release in the United States is an outright atrocity. They're not only pieces of the company's history, but valuable pieces of the history of the art form. To hide them away and hope people forget them is wrong.

[MrV]

I wouldn't waste much time asking about the next movie since (if it really did get green-lit) they are probably still writing out the script.

For the most part if they didn't state it up front, they aren't going to tell people about it. Especially when there are tons of people there that own just a single share.

As for song of the south... unless they could release it in a way that wouldn't offend people, it's not going to be released in it's original format. They probably wish they could burn it up and pretend it never existed.

[IllusionOfLife]

If someone would be so kind to transcribe, or at least summarize the parts regarding Song of the South and TRON I'd really appreciate it. I'm on a Mac and I have a plug-in that's supposed to allow Windows Media Files to work, but for some reason I can't get it to play.

EDIT: Never mind, got it working, now just to wait for it to buffer.

[tronlives]

Thought this might be helpful:

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=129198&p=irol-eventDetails&EventId=3567266

The meeting was recorded and by the sounds of things BrerRabbit got the last question. Go to 1.31 for the start of Song of the South question. Reaction to Tron question doesn't give anything away which isn't really surprising.

[dalamar23666]

This is a bit OT, but since you are going I figure I better ask. Please bring up the vote for Song of the South to be released. Hell Disney needs to just put it out there and know that people accept that we were racist.

Thank you for allowing the interruption, I now return you to your regularly scheduled activities.