Gone with the Wind

[roddma]

"Gone with the Wind" is now getting a bunch of flack. I think it does a fine job in portraying the attitudes of the time and shows how a nation progresses. Those who dont know history often repeat it and sugar coating wouldnt do it justice..

[DaffyDill]

My mum took me to see GWTW at a drive in years ago when I was about 11, and it was one of those drive ins with two screens facing opposite directions. She let me sit in the drivers seat, and didn't realise that if I looked in the rear vision mirror I could watch the other movie. Caligula :lol:

What are people saying about GWTW? I aways assumed it was fairly accurate, but then I'm an Aussie, so not really up on the attitudes and social mores of the south. From what I remember, the slaves were given a fairly sympathetic treatment in the book and the film, but happy to be corrected if that isn't true, I haven't seen the movie for a while, and haven't read the book for years.

[roddma]

A film critic saying it should be regulated to a museum because of racism.

http://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/ju ... om-cinemas

[RosyDaisy]

From what I remember, the slaves were given a fairly sympathetic treatment in the book and the film, but happy to be corrected if that isn't true, I haven't seen the movie for a while, and haven't read the book for years.

That's the point, the slaves were portrayed as happy servants and plantation workers. That is far, far away from the truth. However, we need to consider the time frame that the movie was released in. If I'm not mistaken GWTW was the first movie that allowed a cuss word (Rhett's "Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn.). So, there was no way they were going to portray the real evils of slavery.

[roddma]

The original wording in the book was "My dear I don't give a d***." The story was told through the lens of Scarlett, a privileged heiress who had her world turned upside down.

[RosyDaisy]

That's true, but it still heavily sugar-coated slavery. I blame that on the era in which the book and movie were released.

[aquitana]

I found the book to be very melodramatic and sentimental, and very oversimplified. Noble and self-sacrificing Melanie and beautiful, selfish Scarlett. Not one of my favorite classics.

[Aurora rising]

Me too, Scarlett is a spoiled brat and I had to force myself to finish the book (in my opinion it´s the same league as "Twilight")

[Four is Enough]

I think it portrays the thoughts of Margaret Mitchell more than the actual history. The movie did the horrors of war some justice.

The thing is, people back then sugar-coated slavery. "They need us to take care of them"; "They're happy here"; and other remarks. It was a rationalization, and people need to know that.

There were SOME relationships between master and slave that seemed to transcend the slavery issue, where two children were raised together and became bosom companions throughout life.

There were SOME relationships where master used slave to populate his slave quarters.

I wouldn't use it to teach history, that's for sure. But relegating it to a museum? No. Let people read and then let them read something with real historic value... and make up their own minds.

[Imagine20]

It's an adaptation of a book which obvious isn't a true depiction of slavery. It still has artistic and historical relevance.

Now "Birth of a Nation" is one that needs discussion.

[roddma]

I can still hear Carol Burnette in the GWTW spoof saying " I saw it in the window and had to have it." And Vicky Lawrence screeching "Miss Starlette Miss Starlette"

[zebra #13]

I never thought it was a prescription--a description, rather.

One thing that stood out for me, as a child, was the fact that the actors who played the slaves were *real* people. Which was a whole new concept in Hollywood. And those actors, and those who followed were tremendously grateful for that.

Besides which, to remove Butterfly McQueen's wonderful "Ah, Mz Scawlet, I don't know nuffin 'bout birthin babies" from the culture, would be a real pity.

[louisa05]

I think it portrays the thoughts of Margaret Mitchell more than the actual history. The movie did the horrors of war some justice.

The thing is, people back then sugar-coated slavery. "They need us to take care of them"; "They're happy here"; and other remarks. It was a rationalization, and people need to know that.

There were SOME relationships between master and slave that seemed to transcend the slavery issue, where two children were raised together and became bosom companions throughout life.

There were SOME relationships where master used slave to populate his slave quarters.

I wouldn't use it to teach history, that's for sure. But relegating it to a museum? No. Let people read and then let them read something with real historic value... and make up their own minds.

My nephew's class watched it in 4th grade for their "Civil War Unit" in "Alabama History" class.

In case you ever wondered why Alabama is consistently in the bottom 5 of education rankings.

What we need to do instead of trying to ban movies like this is do a better job of making people realize that historical films are rarely 100% historically true.

[PennySycamore]

I first saw GWTW at a drive-in when I was 4 or 5. All I could remember about it was that there was a girl in a pretty white dress walking across the yard at the beginning and a big fire in it. I have seen the film several times since then, including this spring, and actually have the movie on DVD which I've not watched. The film is considerably toned down from the novel. That meeting that Rhett, Ashley, Dr Meade and Frank Kennedy go to in which Frank gets killed and the other guys lie to the authorities by saying they were at Belle Watling's? That was a Klan meeting. I think that the book also contains a fairly liberal use of the "n" word. Hattie McDaniel won a much-deserved Academy Award for her portrayal of Mammy. She however, was not invited to the premiere in Atlanta and possibly the fact that she could not have sat with the rest of the cast was part of the reason, but from what I have read, she also did not get a good seat at the Oscar ceremony and her speech may have been written by the studio.

Btw, I have heard a swear word in a pre-Code film the name of which escapes me at the moment. You didn't hear swearing in a lot of pre-Code films though.

[DGayle]

GWTW wasn't a documentary. It was the south seen through the eyes of plantation-owners who didn't always understand that they were dealing with real people. We aren't supposed to like Scarlett. She's the anti-hero.

Damn wasn't allowed in the movie. Selznick ignored the censors, and was fined $5,000 for it.

[DGayle]

Penny, the reason Hattie wasn't invited had nothing to do with not getting to sit with the rest of the cast. That theater didn't allow black people inside. Clark Gable was so furious that he was going to boycott the premier altogether, but Hattie talked him into going. Clark was a major supporter of equal rights.

[PennySycamore]

Penny, the reason Hattie wasn't invited had nothing to do with not getting to sit with the rest of the cast. That theater didn't allow black people inside. Clark Gable was so furious that he was going to boycott the premier altogether, but Hattie talked him into going. Clark was a major supporter of equal rights.

Theatres in the Jim Crow South typically had a segregated section, usually the balcony, for African-American people. I can still remember when the movie theatre in my hometown had a segregated balcony. I don't know that the Loew's Grand didn't allow black customers at all or whether they just had to sit in the black section. Segregation just seems so crazy to me.

Good for Clark Gable, btw!

[DGayle]

Penny, that theater was so anti-black that Hattie and Butterfly weren't even allowed to be in the program! So several steps beyond merely saying "you sit in the back." I'm almost surprised that the theater didn't require the studio to edit out all the black people.

[ADoyle90815]

I can still hear Carol Burnette in the GWTW spoof saying " I saw it in the window and had to have it." And Vicky Lawrence screeching "Miss Starlette Miss Starlette"

Same for me, in fact I can't watch the curtain dress scene in GWTW without thinking of that spoof. To me, trying to ban this movie and book is just as ridiculous as the pressure to change the name of a local elementary school in my city because it was named after Robert E Lee.

[DeFrauder]

GWTW wasn't a documentary. It was the south seen through the eyes of plantation-owners who didn't always understand that they were dealing with real people. We aren't supposed to like Scarlett. She's the anti-hero.

Damn wasn't allowed in the movie. Selznick ignored the censors, and was fined $5,000 for it.

I feel the movie is a lot different than the book.

For one, Scarlett is not as stupid in the book as she is in the movie.

It has been 10 years since I read it, but I found the book to be very anti war and pro feminist. It is also quite critical of Southern culture and ideals. The movie didn't manage to get the same message across.

Even the opening scenes where Scarlett is excited that she is going to eat some BBQ, but it turns out her mother doesn't believe it is appropriate for a young woman to admit that she eats so they have Mamie (who agrees with Mama) pretty much force feed her in advance so that she will be much too stuffed to do anything more than pretend to nibble at the party. The entire novel is about the conflict between what Scarlett is expected to do and what her intellect and ambition drives her to do. She gets a lot of abuse for doing what she is driven to do.

Plus she thought the Southern cause was a fools errand. Both Scarlett and Rhett make that point several times throughout the novel.

Its not a pro Confederacy novel by any means.

[DeFrauder]

Theatres in the Jim Crow South typically had a segregated section, usually the balcony, for African-American people. I can still remember when the movie theatre in my hometown had a segregated balcony. I don't know that the Loew's Grand didn't allow black customers at all or whether they just had to sit in the black section. Segregation just seems so crazy to me.

Good for Clark Gable, btw!

Here is a link about that Oscars stuff and Hattie: .hollywoodreporter.com/news/oscars-first-black-winner-accepted-774335

[kpmom]

Even the opening scenes where Scarlett is excited that she is going to eat some BBQ, but it turns out her mother doesn't believe it is appropriate for a young woman to admit that she eats so they have Mamie (who agrees with Mama) pretty much force feed her in advance so that she will be much too stuffed to do anything more than pretend to nibble at the party. The entire novel is about the conflict between what Scarlett is expected to do and what her intellect and ambition drives her to do. She gets a lot of abuse for doing what she is driven to do.

Plus she thought the Southern cause was a fools errand. Both Scarlett and Rhett make that point several times throughout the novel.

Its not a pro Confederacy novel by any means.

Well said DeFrauder. I've always thought that too.

Scarlett pulled her family and Tara through the war, but still had to stifle her intellect. She was despised by her neighbors for having a brain and business acumen.

You're right, the book made that point very clear. The movie did not.

[quincygal]

OK, sorry to jump in so late, laptop just got fixed & returned.

I've read it so many times that I've had several copies wear out. Don't buy the Avon published ones- the glue gives out time & time again!

The slavery aspect I absolutely cannot picture as being accurate. I agree that most of their slaves likely would have run out on them, and that Pork & Mammy might MIGHT have stayed as they knew no other life, nor cared to start over later in life. But Mammy's denial about being a free woman (revising her words) and that she still belonged to the family seem....(shaking head)

Margaret Mitchell wrote several family stories into GWTW. Lumber merchant, Irishman's daughter (or granddaughter), home on Peachtree St in Atlanta, multiple marriages, maternal demise, and her own lifestyle of being active & involved in the larger world are seen vividly in Scarlett. She IS Scarlett. Scarlett is the anti-hero (right? editor folks help me out here).

Melanie is the other half of the coin. Melanie is everything Scarlett is not and vice versa. Their enduring relationship (not always with Scarlett's appreciation) speak volumes to me as someone who sees her "true" sisters as being her 2 BFF's since jr high, not my biological sister. Melanie & Scarlett hang TOGETHER for better or worse, unlike Scarlett's own two sisters. Melanie, still healing from a traumatic birth that Scarlett aided her in and evacuated her from Atlanta as it fell, hauls herself from bed to come to Scarlett's aid when the marauding Yankee passes through. Melanie loves her unconditionally & calls Scarlett "the beatenest [sp] sister ever".

My interpretation is that it is the story of a woman driven to care for her family in ways that are not acceptable for women in that age, and her rejection by society, but the love she still receives from her family. It is about the love she & Rhett have for each other, but she still falls prey to a stupid old crush on Ashley, and that she cannot realize how Melanie IS her other half in many ways until the end. (I also love the plotline of Rhett's alternating wooing of & complete mocking of Atlanta's old Guard:)

Upshot- movie good, but gotta read the book- they wrote out several characters I adore & appreciate. Will Benteen anyone???? Read the book but do NOT take it as the truth. The KKK was not a noble group deserving of protection. They should have explored the "ward" of Rhett's & his parentage more. Belle Watling got the short end of the stick:( I appreciate it for the strong female characters, not the accurate depiction of the history of that time & location.

Also, watch the scene of the big dance in Atlanta in color- I LOVE the costuming:)

DO NOT read the sequel. It is terrible.

Source- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Mitchell

[Phteven]

"Gone with the Wind" is now getting a bunch of flack. I think it does a fine job in portraying the attitudes of the time and shows how a nation progresses. Those who dont know history often repeat it and sugar coating wouldnt do it justice..

Why is it NOW getting flack? It's not like it's 70some odd years old or anything. Weird.

As an aside, I adore GWTW and have read it no less than a dozen times. Love love love.

[BamaBelle]

My nephew's class watched it in 4th grade for their "Civil War Unit" in "Alabama History" class.

In case you ever wondered why Alabama is consistently in the bottom 5 of education rankings.

What we need to do instead of trying to ban movies like this is do a better job of making people realize that historical films are rarely 100% historically true.

Sadly we weren't allowed to watch GWTW in 4th grade AL history, but did watch it in 11th grade AL history. Of course, the class was taught by the football coach and we also watched Tora! Tora! Tora! and Patton when covering WWII. McArthur took care of Korea and Platoon for Vietnam.