Warner Archive Collection Blu-ray Discussion Thread

[senseabove]

As I said before:

Originally Posted by senseabove

Folks, GWTW showed in the most liberal metropolitan area in the country to a packed movie palace, including the balcony, for four evenings and two matinees in January of 2020. It's gonna be fine. If WB is worried about anything, it's ROI, not some backlash that a pre-disc menu disclaimer and a contextualizing interview will mitigate save for a few think-pieces no one to the right of Film Twitter will read.

[HenryHill]

GWTW will always be a monumental film, but the reception for it today is chillier in an era where the slave-holding South is no longer viewed through a gauzy lens. I'd love to have a 4K release, but there is no upside for WHV to release it when the sales for physical media diminish more each passing year.

[Jlouisbarrett]

Originally Posted by Rayjg

Which CDs have racist warnings

They have “Parental Advisories,” which is an umbrella for a wide range of content that parents and general modern society may deem “inappropriate,” which certainly can include racist language. If a song has the N-word in it, then it’ll get slapped with the Parental Advisory badge. It’s been this way for ~30 years.

Furthermore, all movie trailers and movies themselves have ratings that include a little box that “warns” that the film includes anything from “offensive language,” “drug use,” “sexual content,” etc., and they have for decades. Television shows feature the same disclaimers.

This absolute screeching hyperbole about historical context disclaimers ahead of films like “Gone with the Wind” is absolutely absurd and I’m so over a certain segment of the population acting like these movies are being personally pulled from circulation by Joe Biden or the Twitter cancel mob or some shit. Nothing of the sort is happening. Nothing of the sort will ever happen. The ONE example one could maybe trot out is “Song of the South,” but even that is a decision by a private company to not have their own film in circulation. Which is a little something called the free market and free speech. They have the right to do so. I don’t personally agree with it, but hey, you can still download a nice 20+ GB 35mm film scan on the internet, so it’s still out there if one wants to view it.

Cancel culture and “censorship” doesn’t exist except to those who constantly whine and screech about it and make up wild prophecies about “the road we’re heading down.” Adding a non-intrusive disclaimer contextualizing films that DO definitely need some historical context is a good thing. People should be educated. Kids viewing the film today should understand where the film was coming from, when it was made and the society from which it was created. They can then view the film and form their own opinions and make up their own minds. It’s a wonderful thing.

[Mister_Kidd]

Originally Posted by Aclea

You'd be hard pressed to find a more easily available film from 1939.

The Wizard of Oz?

[Aclea]

Originally Posted by Mister_Kidd

The Wizard of Oz?

That's the one.

[jkoffman]

It was a year ago that this same tired GWTW dead horse came limping along and I had to remind those folks that it’s been for sale on BD for $5-$7 since 2018, so 4 years straight now. It’s more accessible to the public than the vast majority of classic films. A simple fact that gets ignored is that tastes and interests change as well.

[darrellmaclaine]

Originally Posted by Ned Brainard

Interesting to learn. Sometimes rights problems only pertain to certain countries. In the case of Remains to be Seen, it may very well be cleared for distribution in the UK and Europe. The Perfect Specimen, another rights hell title for WB, has played on UK TCM in more recent times while it is still prohibited from circulation in the US domestic market.

Although sadly these days the UK version of TCM is next to useless for anything. It is a zombie corpse of what it once was and what it evidently still is in the US. Yet they still bring out all the TCM-branded books over here, which is odd.

[RCRochester]

I would hazard a guess that the reason there is no 4K of GWTW yet could simply be because Warner don't see it is all that financially viable anymore.

It's been an evergreen title for sure and there have been multiple blu-ray releases over the years at almost every other anniversary and I simply think that the market for the film has been saturated. The fanbase for this film is aging out and many are not the type to upgrade to 4K.

The controversy surrounding it surely plays a part but that goes hand-in-hand with it being an old fashioned film both in content and filmmaking style that won't resonate as much with younger audiences (and by younger, I'm including most people in their 30s or 40s). "Cool" films from the 60s or 70s by the likes of Kubrick or nostalgia trips for 80s kids like Gremlins or Goonies must surely be more of a moneymaker for Warner nowadays.

[exzachary]

Originally Posted by Jlouisbarrett

Cancel culture and “censorship” doesn’t exist except to those who constantly whine and screech about it and make up wild prophecies about “the road we’re heading down.”

Like Song of the South?

[jkoffman]

Originally Posted by exzachary

Like Song of the South?

As always, you’d have to ask Disney, the only people preventing you from seeing it.

[exzachary]

Originally Posted by jkoffman

As always, you’d have to ask Disney, the only people preventing you from seeing it.

Banning a movie from being released is censorship.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by exzachary

Banning a movie from being released is censorship.

Disney themselves have suppressed it and it's been 30+ years. It's a bit disingenuous to use that as an example in the current discussion surrounding Gone With the Wind.

[gudemameshiba]

Originally Posted by exzachary

Banning a movie from being released is censorship.

Please publish everything you have ever recorded in any context and in any medium and share it with all of us. Or are you a censor too?

[jkoffman]

Originally Posted by exzachary

Banning a movie from being released is censorship.

Maybe you should start a campaign or something. This is the WAC forum though, so you’ve accomplished nothing so far. This all must be terribly upsetting for you. When you talk to Disney, please ask them why they’ve banned the 1977 Star Wars as well.

[exzachary]

Originally Posted by gudemameshiba

Please publish everything you have ever recorded in any context and in any medium and share it with all of us. Or are you a censor too?

I'm not a movie studio that release products to the public. Great analogy though!

[SoundOfSilence]

The problem I have with these panel discussions about classic films and the attempt to place them in a historical context is that they are usually lead by film critics who are not historians. They often do not understand that history has been rewritten on occasion.

I haven't seen any of the Jacqueline Stewart presentations. I have only read about them. So my comments are based on those articles. And maybe my points were addressed in the presentations.

Take Psycho. The film was criticized for transgender identity and implications of equating gender fluidity and dressing in women’s clothes with mental illness and violence.

No it didn't.

Norman Bates suffered from Dissociative Identity Disorder (multiple personalities). He didn’t want to become a woman or even dress like one. He was possessed by an alter ego in the form of his mother. Of course Bates was also a psychopath. Throw in a dash of Freud’s Oedipus complex and there you have it.

But nowhere in the film was it argued that a little bit of angry dressing will turn you into a knife-wielding shower slasher.

Swing Time was criticized for Astaire wearing blackface.

Today, audiences are shocked by this. As I was when I watched it for the first time.

However, as most of you will know, the title of the "Bojangles of Harlem" number is a tribute to Bill "Bojangles" Robinson. Whereas the actual dance routine is a tribute and a mark of respect to Fred's mentor, John Bubbles. It was John Bubbles who taught Fred to tap dance in the 1920s. Fred described John as the best tap dancer of his generation. Fred is dressed and made up to look like Bubbles as Sportin' Life in Porgy and Bess. A 1930s' audience would have been quite familiar with Bubbles, so they would have understood exactly what Astaire was doing.

That's the problem with applying today's lens to history. What we may find as offensive just wasn't taken in that light.

Eleanor Powell also put on blackface in the 1930s. She did Robinson's famous stair routine (the one with Shirley Temple). Robinson not only approved of her performance he even taught her his routine. The only time he ever did as far as I am aware.

I've read that one criticism of GWTW was the treatment of Hattie McDaniel at the Oscars. Definitely appalling.

But that is not the film's fault. It is the venue's.

And what is often lacking from these discussions is the fact that the cast complained to Selznick and he had her moved closer to the stage.

I understand that Clark Gable was a good friend of Hattie's and would often visit to enjoy her Southern cooking on Sunday's.

That may explain his weight gain in later years.

I guess the point I'm getting at is that some people are determined to be offended and will look for reasons why. Particularly if they are also pursuing a political agenda.

Maybe I'm being paranoid but I get the feeling that the classics will not be around to buy on disc forever.

I don't think having electronic copies on drives is safe either. A number of years ago an episode of Ventura's Conspiracy Theories was remotely deleted from people's DVRs.

[exzachary]

Originally Posted by jkoffman

Maybe you should start a campaign or something. This is the WAC forum though, so you’ve accomplished nothing so far. This all must be terribly upsetting for you. When you talk to Disney, please ask them why they’ve banned the 1977 Star Wars as well.

Maybe you should read Jlouisbarrett's absurd post claiming that cancel culture and censorship doesn't exist.

[gudemameshiba]

Originally Posted by SoundOfSilence

That's the problem with applying today's lens to history. What we may find as offensive just wasn't taken in that light.

[Show spoiler]

[jkoffman]

Originally Posted by exzachary

Maybe you should read Jlouisbarrett's absurd post claiming that cancel culture and censorship doesn't exist.

Maybe you should just chill because the only 2 films mentioned are not newly discovered to be historically sensitive stories. One way to bolster your argument would be to offer context. I provided that you can buy (or even rent) GWTW for the same price as a coffee. Feel free to expand your great list of "canceled" movies that you can no longer see and provide examples of actual censorship. Tell us about the market for old civil war dramas in 21st century society. Go beyond the catchphrase posts if you need to. Show your work.

[SoundOfSilence]

Originally Posted by gudemameshiba

[Show spoiler]

Were they out protesting Fred Astaire?