Unofficial Academy Awards Discussion Board

Anyone who has ever wanted to see Marcel Ophuls' staggering brilliant The Memory of Justice (1976) now is your chance as it has turned up on YouTube.

Its the recently restored 4K print and it looks sensational. Its 4 hours 41 minutes running time flies by.

Just one word of warning. When I watched it the connection was lost twice. The first time about 3 hors 30 minutes into the film and then again about 45 minutes later. It meant finding the film again and fast forwarding which was a little cumbersome. Worth the effort because this is a magnificent documentary and is so relevant to todays world. The interview that Marcel Ophuls did with Albert Speer which is shown in portions throughout the film are priceless.

Big Magilla wrote:

Precious Doll wrote:Birds Do It, Bees Do It is currently on YouTube. Nominated for song.

Nope. It was nominated for Best Dramatic Score, losing to Jaws. The other nominees were One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Bite the Bullet and The Wind and the Lion.

My bad and I should have known better.

Precious Doll wrote:Birds Do It, Bees Do It is currently on YouTube. Nominated for song.

Nope. It was nominated for Best Dramatic Score, losing to Jaws. The other nominees were One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Bite the Bullet and The Wind and the Lion.

Birds Do It, Bees Do It is currently on YouTube. Nominated for song.

The hard to see My Son, My Son (1940) which was nominated for best art direction (black & white) is currently playing on YouTube.

Mister Tee wrote:The reference to Dumbo here is unclear: are they just saying the name Jim Crow is offensive, or do they mean the entire "When I See an Elephant Fly" scene? If the latter...I'm sure it comes off a bit minstrel-y today, but it's a rollicking number -- by far my favorite part of the movie when I was a kid -- and censoring it is something I think comes closer to trying to wipe out the past because it doesn't conform to contemporary norms.

They mean the entire "When Elephants Fly" scene. There is no character named Jim Crow.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_v2exWrsGOc

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_(character)

Reza wrote:

Big Magilla wrote: It would have to have been after February 2003 because I distinctly remember being in a house I owned from that date through mid-2011.

This must have been your lovely house in San Francisco we visited during the summer of 2003.

It was in a San Francisco suburb, but close enough.

Big Magilla wrote: It would have to have been after February 2003 because I distinctly remember being in a house I owned from that date through mid-2011.

This must have been your lovely house in San Francisco we visited during the summer of 2003.

I purchased my DVD copy on-line sometime after February 2003. I don't remember from where, I no longer have the case due to downsizing my collection but I'm pretty sure it was a legitimate copy originally sold at Disneyland Paris. It would have to have been after February 2003 because I distinctly remember being in a house I owned from that date through mid-2011.

The film is based on the Uncle Remus stories written by folklorist Joel Chandler Harris (1848-1908) from 1880 on. The stories were written from "the African-American oral tradition." In other words, passed down from slaves and their descendants.

Thanks for that.

If only I could have seen into the future I would have purchased a couple of video tapes of it when it was released in Australia in 1980s for a nice big profit on eBay now.

Precious Doll wrote:

Mister Tee wrote:Song of the South hasn't been available for years -- I know from a long period of trying to rent/buy a copy. I finally was able to see it in pieces on YouTube sometime in the past 2-3 years; people periodically post it there, and it stays up till Disney catches it and has it removed.

Mister Tee, Was Song of the South ever released on video tape in the US?

I found this online, and it comports with my memory:

"You cannot find this movie anywhere because after Song of the South's last theatrical release in 1986, Disney decided not to re-release it again, most likely because of the movie's "racist" stigma (although there are no documented complaints stemming from the movie's 1986 theatrical release that I'm aware of.) The movie has been released on video and laserdisc in many other countries, but never in the United States. As of December 2001, Song of the South was withdrawn worldwide."

Mister Tee wrote:Song of the South hasn't been available for years -- I know from a long period of trying to rent/buy a copy. I finally was able to see it in pieces on YouTube sometime in the past 2-3 years; people periodically post it there, and it stays up till Disney catches it and has it removed.

Mister Tee, Was Song of the South ever released on video tape in the US?

Reza wrote: Don't viewers today have the brains to do that without being explained? Every old film needs to be evaluated the same way. You automatically understand that what is depicted on screen, even something wrong, was either acceptable back then or was shown because of certain reasons which history has made crystal clear.

I don't think some of them do and we have two main problems with some older films today.

1) Outrage - people are so easily outraged, even about things made or written years ago. They always have been with the banning over the years of films, books, plays, songs, etc but there have been an awful lot of articles written in the last couple of years virtually wanting to erase some films because of their depiction of race, sex, women, gays, etc. John Hughes innocuous and much loved teen flicks of the 80s are now viewed by some as the ultimate evil, not to mention the films of Roman Polanski & Woody Allen by others. Really, in the culture of widespread outrage we have probably all been guilty of it to some degree, I know I have (Mary Queen of Scots anyone). So to help avoid 'outrage' a disclaimer before the film might soften some of that.

2) Propaganda/Sterotypes - Because of the nature of some works they can be used to justify deplorable behaviour or reinforce inaccurate stereotypes. I recall when William Friedkin's Crusing (1980) was being filmed that their were protests about the film due to its subject matter. The view of those objecting were rightly concerned that the lifestyle of homosexuals depicted in the film would be seen by the wider community as the norm when in fact the film was set it a subculture of gay mens lives. If I'm not mistaken when it was released in cinemas and on DVD it had a disclaimer stating that the film only represented a small section of the gay community - or something like that.

People with an agenda will grab anything to use against others, so really disclaimers are at least useful for setting things out up front about the intentions of the films and in the case of older films their historical setting. The Eternal Jew (1940) & Jud Süß (1940), two of the most famous Nazi propaganda films, should never be viewed without a explanatory title card.[/quote]

Song of the South hasn't been available for years -- I know from a long period of trying to rent/buy a copy. I finally was able to see it in pieces on YouTube sometime in the past 2-3 years; people periodically post it there, and it stays up till Disney catches it and has it removed.

It's not exactly a gem of a film -- the live-action stuff is pretty dreary, and only Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah truly distinguishes the film -- and I can understand Disney's stance toward the film. It's not just it fails modern-day racially enlightened standards; it actively romanticizes plantation life. It's certainly true that most film sequences involving black actors pre-Sidney Poitier are similarly racist-in-retrospect (there's a scene in 1931's Cimarron that makes me completely cringe), but Disney may feel that its position as guardian to young children -- even today, many kids' first exposure to movies comes from a Disney film -- gives it a greater responsibility to police content.

The reference to Dumbo here is unclear: are they just saying the name Jim Crow is offensive, or do they mean the entire "When I See an Elephant Fly" scene? If the latter...I'm sure it comes off a bit minstrel-y today, but it's a rollicking number -- by far my favorite part of the movie when I was a kid -- and censoring it is something I think comes closer to trying to wipe out the past because it doesn't conform to contemporary norms.

An explanatory explanation would be preferable to burying the film.