Song of the South is not racist. There are no slaves in it. Read “Who’s afraid of Song of the South” https://www.amazon.com/Afraid-South-Forbidden-Disney-Stories-ebook/dp/B00AG6G250
You think Walt inked that scene in himself? yeah, today it is very not politically correct, but back then, it would be fully.
They got paid according to experience, and that was industry standard, in fact Walt paid more than others.
In fact it is suggested they did. But he’s just a jerk.
Are you setting the standard for racism at slavery?
Well, America solved racism forever in the 1860s, don’t’cha know?
Gaston is one of Disney’s best villains, but I wouldn’t call him evil. He’s just full of himself. He’s not doing anything bad – he wants to rescue Belle because he thinks that they were made for each other. But his pursuit of her shows he wants to change her mind, not force her to do what she wants. He’s deluded, but does respect Belle enough to try to convince her by his actions and words and, though he doesn’t give up, he accepts her “no” – for now. Annoying to her, certainly, but not evil.
He’s a great villain because he thinks he’s the hero. From his point of view, he’s going after a terrible monster who, let’s face it, forces Belle to come to his castle.
Bambi’s mom would essentially beat the shit out of Bambi and drive him off when he’s old enough. This will help avoid the inevitable incest if they had the same territory. Also assuming Man is not poaching and it is legal season, Bambi is old enough to survive on his own. Fawn mortality is extremely high early on but by that time he’s essentially an adult.
Bambi’s mom was a delicious villain.
And Bambi and Faline’s romance will be the “hit it and quit it” type. But she will breed with many other males that season.
And this happened, what, ten years before the movie really gets underway, right? And he has to get the curse lifted by his twenty-first birthday? Which means they all spent that decade paying a horrible price for — an eleven-year-old saying a stranger couldn’t spend the night at his place? (No, wait; ten? Was he only ten?)
They gave the Beauty & the Beast witch a name and a backstory in the live action version. She’s Agathe. What's Up With Agathe In 'Beauty And The Beast'? She's A Complicated Character, To Say The Least
what the fuck are you talking about? 
The NAACP, before they saw the film, and also now many others, objected to the film because it 'showed happy slaves", that’s the reason SotS is called 'racist". Of course that was 100% due to ignorance, the film was set well after the Civil War.
I assumed your average person would know that.
Technically speaking, the bad guys from The Crow.
(But another vote for the Horned King. The man had style.)
If we’re counting Miramax, then I vote Harvey Weinstein as the real villain.
See? thelurkinghorror gets it!
Holy crap! :eek: I didn’t even realize that, but I just watched the opening curse clip from the animated version, and you’re right. It explicitly states that the magical flower would flourish until his twenty-first year.
So some crazy enchantress showed up to the home of an unaccompanied minor, demanded entry, and when denied she cursed him, and all the attendant employees, possibly for all time.
That’s some god awful villainy if you ask me.
if we’re counting Miramax - Pinhead for the win.
(quote shortened by me - I assume we’re talking fictional villains here, the above sidetrack about Walt notwithstanding)
It was set after the Civil War, yes. But the Uncle Remus character is still an ex-slave who stuck with his master, and the film does paint that relationship as rosy and happy. Uncle Remus and all the other black people in the film still live in a slave’s quarters on the property and are still clearly subservient to the white people–and they are happy with that.
The NAACP did not comment before seeing the film. The guy who wrote the official response had not personally seen the film, but he was only echoing the reports from other members who had. And it wasn’t just the NAACP that thought the film was set in the antebellum South–that was the opinion of most reviewers of the time, because the film itself did not clarify when it is set–lines doing so were removed from the film.
That said, the problems remain even knowing that Uncle Remus isn’t a slave, because there is no way that the character depicted went through the horribleness of slavery. He tries to run away because Johnny isn’t allowed to talk to him. His life with them must’ve been pretty cushy if something that small was reason enough to want to leave.
The NAACP also did not completely decry the film–they also said the film had extensive artistic merit. That’s the sort of comment that would make it no different than, say, Gone With the Wind.
Finally–and probably most importantly to your claim–that isn’t the only objection to the film. There are also objections to racist stereotypes. The glorification of slavery wasn’t their only point.
Here’s the Wikipedia article, with a lot more information.
The Headless Horseman.
Your first two ideas are false.
And here is part of what the NAACP released “…the production helps to perpetuate a dangerously glorified picture of slavery. …” becuase they thought Uncle Remus etc were slaves. He wrote that based on ignorance and the NAACP has since withdrawn that statement, if you read “Who is afraid of Song of the South” .
You are basing your opinion on a Wikipedia page. :rolleyes:I am basing mine on the definitive BOOK written about the movie.
You could say the same about Jafar, couldn’t you? IIRC, Jasmin’s dad was fairly useless.
Cruella de Vil
Cruella de Vil
If she doesn’t scare you
No evil thing will
To see her is to take a sudden chill
Cruella Cruella de Vil
Tough to say, really. We only see him after Jafar is clearly influencing him with the Snake Staff of Doom. The two times we see him actively having agency the first time he’s wondering about Jasmine and Jafar hexes him and at the end he shakes it off and declares that she can marry the kid with the pants.
So the jury has to be out on the Sultan. Sure, he ain’t exactly Sweden in terms of enlightenment, but we don’t know he’s actively incompetent or dangerous.
Kuzco, on the other hand, is actively neglectful and disdainful of his subjects to the point of making them homeless and even having one toss off a building simply for interrupting his dance. Prior to his enlightenment, Kuzco is, simply, a self-absorbed dick.
3 categories of Disney villainy:
1.) Extreme Cruelty/Sadism : Cruella de Vil, Mother Gothel, probably Frollo.
2.) Actual murder: Scar (fratricide!). Also Syndrome has his robot kill multiple supers.
3.) Uses black magic/implies allied with dark forces: the Evil Queen, and Malificent.